Investigation of Performance Difference between Photo‐Charging and Conventional Constant Current Charging for Energy Storage Batteries
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Solar cells offer clean and abundant power sources for directly photo‐charging rechargeable batteries, which shows great potential for the development of integrated power supply. In order to deepen the understanding of the novel type of charging process, this research takes silicon solar cells and lithium cobalt oxide batteries as examples to compare the performance difference between photo‐charging and conventional constant current charging in detail. Surprisingly, the photo‐charging turns out to be superior in charging efficiency, polarization mitigation, and cyclic performance even with the intrinsic instability of the solar cells when compared with constant current charging mode. Finally, this research optimizes the calculation method of energy storage efficiency in the integrated power supply by calculating the actual power during the photo‐charging process by recording the voltage and current change with time. Besides, the power matching degree is quantified by the ratio of to η1, providing new ideas for the matching method of solar cells and rechargeable batteries in integrated power supplies.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Battery Technologies Research · Advanced battery technologies research · Advancements in Battery Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Metallurgy and Environment Engineering Research Center of the Ministry of Education for Advanced Battery Materials Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Nonferrous Value‐added Metallurgy Central South University Lushan South Road 932 Changsha 410083 China
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (24)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.nantod.2017.08.00710.1016/j.nantod.2017.08.007 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.mtener.2017.10.00510.1016/j.mtener.2017.10.005 ↗
3. 10.1038/nenergy.2016.11110.1038/nenergy.2016.111 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.00910.1016/j.rser.2015.12.009 ↗
5. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c0056510.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00565 ↗
6. 10.1038/s41467-020-15355-010.1038/s41467-020-15355-0 ↗
7. 10.1002/aenm.20170178510.1002/aenm.201701785 ↗
8. 10.1002/anie.20170377210.1002/anie.201703772 ↗
9. 10.1002/aenm.20170300810.1002/aenm.201703008 ↗
10. 10.1039/C7EE00524E10.1039/C7EE00524E ↗
11. 10.1002/adma.20160595810.1002/adma.201605958 ↗
12. 10.1002/adma.20170631010.1002/adma.201706310 ↗
13. 10.1002/adma.20180651010.1002/adma.201806510 ↗
14. 10.1002/adsu.20180011110.1002/adsu.201800111 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.solener.2020.05.01810.1016/j.solener.2020.05.018 ↗
16. 10.1126/science.125830710.1126/science.1258307 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.solmat.2013.05.04310.1016/j.solmat.2013.05.043 ↗
18. 10.1039/c1ee02303a10.1039/c1ee02303a ↗
19. 10.1016/j.solmat.2007.03.02510.1016/j.solmat.2007.03.025 ↗
20. 10.1021/nl300715910.1021/nl3007159 ↗
21. 10.1038/ncomms910310.1038/ncomms9103 ↗
22. 10.1002/advs.20190062010.1002/advs.201900620 ↗
23. 10.1002/aenm.20190087210.1002/aenm.201900872 ↗
24. 10.1039/C6EE03266D10.1039/C6EE03266D ↗