Cyclic aging monitoring of lithium-ion battery based on acoustic emission
Source abstract
Abstract
A timely and accurate understanding of the state of health (SOH) of lithium-ion batteries is essential for early detection and prediction of their potential safety risks. Acoustic emission (AE) can perform dynamic non-destructive testing of lithium-ion batteries under normal charge-discharge cycles, and detect the deformation of internal electrodes of the battery behavior. In this paper, firstly, the whole aging process of lithium-ion batteries and recorded AE signals are monitored. Secondly, the waveform and signal time interval from AE signals during battery aging in the time domain is extracted. Thirdly, the spectrum of AE signals is analyzed. The experimental results show that the total number of AE signals will change with the decline of battery capacity and SOH. The turning point in the time interval waveform of the battery AE signal can be used to identify the constant current or voltage charging mode. The AE signals of batteries mainly exist in two frequency bands, where the content of frequency band 1 is about 10kHz-120kHz, and the range of frequency band 2 is about 130kHz-180kHz. The maximum amplitude of frequency bands 1 and 2 shows their characteristics during the charging and discharging process.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Battery Technologies Research · Advancements in Battery Materials · Advanced battery technologies research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
State Key Laboratory of Operation and Control of Renewable Energy & Storage Systems, China Electric Power Research Institute, Beijing, China
College of Electrical and Information Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha, China
Queen Mary University of London Engineering School, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi ‘an, China
State Grid Xiangtan ETDZ Power Supply Company, Xiangtan, China
Funding
Electric Power Research Institute
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/s2104108710.3390/s21041087 ↗
2. 10.1115/1.404223410.1115/1.4042234 ↗
3. 10.1109/TIE.2010.204303510.1109/TIE.2010.2043035 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.energy.2018.05.07910.1016/j.energy.2018.05.079 ↗
5. 10.1186/s10033-022-00697-110.1186/s10033-022-00697-1 ↗
6. 10.3390/machines1003017810.3390/machines10030178 ↗
7. 10.1021/acs.jpclett.8b0218510.1021/acs.jpclett.8b02185 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2021.04.13010.1016/j.ceramint.2021.04.130 ↗
9. 10.1038/s41598-020-58021-710.1038/s41598-020-58021-7 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.est.2019.10081710.1016/j.est.2019.100817 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.11425310.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114253 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.12.07110.1016/j.apenergy.2018.12.071 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.11810.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.118 ↗
14. 10.1109/TIE.2017.278222410.1109/TIE.2017.2782224 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.est.2020.10185910.1016/j.est.2020.101859 ↗
16. 10.1109/TIA.2019.289121310.1109/TIA.2019.2891213 ↗
17. 10.1109/TSG.2016.257895010.1109/TSG.2016.2578950 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.est.2020.10169510.1016/j.est.2020.101695 ↗
19. Hao Q · Case Stud NondestrTest Eval · 2016 · 33 · 75
20. Kumar J · Case Stud NondestrTest Eval · 2015 · 31 · 77
21. Vidya Sagar R · Case Stud NondestrTest Eval · 2011 · 27 · 95
22. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.10714610.1016/j.ymssp.2020.107146 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.microrel.2019.06.05510.1016/j.microrel.2019.06.055 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.10480010.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104800 ↗
25. 10.3390/s2103071210.3390/s21030712 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.electacta.2019.13459610.1016/j.electacta.2019.134596 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.elecom.2010.07.01410.1016/j.elecom.2010.07.014 ↗
28. 10.1002/batt.20200020510.1002/batt.202000205 ↗
29. 10.1080/10589759.2019.169201210.1080/10589759.2019.1692012 ↗