A comparison of battery testing protocols: Those used by the U.S. advanced battery consortium and those used in China

David C. Robertson; Jon P. Christophersen; Taylor Bennett; Lee K. Walker; Fang Wang; Shiqiang Liu; Bin Fan; Ira Bloom

doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.12.004

A comparison of battery testing protocols: Those used by the U.S. advanced battery consortium and those used in China

David C. Robertson, Jon P. Christophersen, Taylor Bennett, Lee K. Walker, Fang Wang, Shiqiang Liu, Bin Fan, Ira Bloom^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two testing protocols, QC/T 743 and those used by the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), were compared using cells based on LiFePO₄/graphite chemistry. Differences in the protocols directly affected the data and the performance decline mechanisms deduced from the data. In all cases, the rate of capacity fade was linear with time. Overall, the testing protocols produced very similar data when the testing conditions and metrics used to define performance were similar. The choice of depth of discharge and pulse width had a direct effect on the apparent rate of resistance increased and estimated cell life. At greater percent depth of discharge (%DOD) and pulse width, the estimated life was shorter that at lower %DOD and shorter pulse width. This indicates that cells which were at the end of life based on the USABC protocol were not at end of life based on the QC/T 743 protocol by a large margin.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	268-273
Number of pages	6
Journal	Journal of Power Sources
Volume	306
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.12.004
Publication status	Published - 29 Feb 2016
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Battery testing
Lithium-ion batteries
Test protocols

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.12.004

Cite this

@article{4084c0deff6440b9bd386941a8fc0dc1,

title = "A comparison of battery testing protocols: Those used by the U.S. advanced battery consortium and those used in China",

abstract = "Two testing protocols, QC/T 743 and those used by the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), were compared using cells based on LiFePO4/graphite chemistry. Differences in the protocols directly affected the data and the performance decline mechanisms deduced from the data. In all cases, the rate of capacity fade was linear with time. Overall, the testing protocols produced very similar data when the testing conditions and metrics used to define performance were similar. The choice of depth of discharge and pulse width had a direct effect on the apparent rate of resistance increased and estimated cell life. At greater percent depth of discharge (%DOD) and pulse width, the estimated life was shorter that at lower %DOD and shorter pulse width. This indicates that cells which were at the end of life based on the USABC protocol were not at end of life based on the QC/T 743 protocol by a large margin.",

keywords = "Battery testing, Lithium-ion batteries, Test protocols",

author = "Robertson, {David C.} and Christophersen, {Jon P.} and Taylor Bennett and Walker, {Lee K.} and Fang Wang and Shiqiang Liu and Bin Fan and Ira Bloom",

year = "2016",

month = feb,

day = "29",

doi = "10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.12.004",

language = "English",

volume = "306",

pages = "268--273",

journal = "Journal of Power Sources",

issn = "0378-7753",

publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of battery testing protocols

T2 - Those used by the U.S. advanced battery consortium and those used in China

AU - Robertson, David C.

AU - Christophersen, Jon P.

AU - Bennett, Taylor

AU - Walker, Lee K.

AU - Wang, Fang

AU - Liu, Shiqiang

AU - Fan, Bin

AU - Bloom, Ira

PY - 2016/2/29

Y1 - 2016/2/29

N2 - Two testing protocols, QC/T 743 and those used by the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), were compared using cells based on LiFePO4/graphite chemistry. Differences in the protocols directly affected the data and the performance decline mechanisms deduced from the data. In all cases, the rate of capacity fade was linear with time. Overall, the testing protocols produced very similar data when the testing conditions and metrics used to define performance were similar. The choice of depth of discharge and pulse width had a direct effect on the apparent rate of resistance increased and estimated cell life. At greater percent depth of discharge (%DOD) and pulse width, the estimated life was shorter that at lower %DOD and shorter pulse width. This indicates that cells which were at the end of life based on the USABC protocol were not at end of life based on the QC/T 743 protocol by a large margin.

AB - Two testing protocols, QC/T 743 and those used by the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), were compared using cells based on LiFePO4/graphite chemistry. Differences in the protocols directly affected the data and the performance decline mechanisms deduced from the data. In all cases, the rate of capacity fade was linear with time. Overall, the testing protocols produced very similar data when the testing conditions and metrics used to define performance were similar. The choice of depth of discharge and pulse width had a direct effect on the apparent rate of resistance increased and estimated cell life. At greater percent depth of discharge (%DOD) and pulse width, the estimated life was shorter that at lower %DOD and shorter pulse width. This indicates that cells which were at the end of life based on the USABC protocol were not at end of life based on the QC/T 743 protocol by a large margin.

KW - Battery testing

KW - Lithium-ion batteries

KW - Test protocols

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84954447451&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.12.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.12.004

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84954447451

SN - 0378-7753

VL - 306

SP - 268

EP - 273

JO - Journal of Power Sources

JF - Journal of Power Sources

ER -

A comparison of battery testing protocols: Those used by the U.S. advanced battery consortium and those used in China

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this