A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries

Hakkı Yavuz; Arda Akyıldız; Mehmet Onur Gulbahce

doi:10.5152/tepes.2024.24007

A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries

Abstract

The increasing importance of batteries across diverse sectors, spanning from consumer electronics to electric vehicles, underscores the critical necessity for precise battery models. This review delineates four primary categories of battery models: empirical, equivalent circuit, data-driven, and physics-based models. Empirical models like the Nernst and Shepherd models offer simplicity but lack precision. Equivalent circuit models strike a balance between simplicity and accuracy, albeit with validation constraints. Data-driven methods leverage machine learning to predict battery performance accurately but require high-quality datasets. Physics-based models integrate fundamental electrochemical processes for detailed understanding, albeit with heightened computational complexity. Comparative analyses, with a focus on lithium-ion batteries, reveal trade-offs between computational efficiency and accuracy. The Single Particle Model and its extension single particle model with electrolyte dynamics emerge as efficient options, with single particle model with electrolyte dynamics showing promising accuracy akin to Single Particle Model. Additionally, comparisons across different battery chemistries unveil varying levels of modeling precision. This article compares different electrochemical modeling techniques across chemistries to discern optimal methods. The electrochemical model, which is one of the battery modeling techniques, has been examined and investigated in detail in this study and has contributed to the literature on how the model with which chemistry works with which electrochemical model. In addition, this study contributed to the existing lithium ferro-phosphate chemistry modeling with optimization technique in pybamm. The synthesis offers insights into diverse modeling methodologies and their implications for battery research and development, guiding future investigations toward more tailored modeling strategies for specific applications.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

This work was supported by İstanbul Technical University (ITU) Scientific Research Projects Unit (BAP) under Project MGA-2022-43948 and in part by the 1004 - Center of Excellence Support Program of TUBITAK under Project 22AG018.

Project Number

MGA-2022-43948 and 22AG018

References

1. J. Meng, G. Luo, M. Ricco, M. Swierczynski, D. I. Stroe, and R. Teodorescu, “Overview of lithium-Ion battery modeling methods for state-ofcharge estimation in electrical vehicles,” In Appl. Sci. (Switzerland), vol. 8, no. 5, 2018.
2. R. Dima, G. Buonanno, S. Costanzo, and R. Solimene, “Robustness for the starting point of two iterative methods for fitting debye or cole–cole models to a dielectric permittivity spectrum,” Appl. Sci. (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 11, 2022.
3. J. Manwell, and J. McGowan, “Extension of the kinetic battery model for wind/hybrid power systems”. 5th European Wind Energy Association Conference and Exhibition (EWEC ‘94), 1994.
4. L. E. Unnewehr, and S. A. Naser, “Electric vehicle technology,”,”. 1982. Available: https ://ww w.osti.gov /bibl io/50 30604 .
5. H. Arunachalam, S. Onori, and I. Battiato, “On veracity of macroscopic lithium-ion battery models,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 162, no. 10, A1940–A1951, 2015.
6. C. Capasso, and O. Veneri, “Experimental analysis on the performance of lithium based batteries for road full electric and hybrid vehicles,” Appl. Energy, vol. 136, 921–930, 2014.
7. X. Hu, F. Sun, Y. Zou, and H. Peng, “Online estimation of an electric vehicle lithium-Ion battery using recursive least squares with forgetting,”, in Proceedings of the American Control Conference, 2011, 935–940.
8. A. A. H. Hussein, and I. Batarseh, “An overview of generic battery models,” IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meet., 1–6, 2011.

9. B. Steven, C. H. Applied, and S. C. Hageman, Using PSpice to Simulate the Discharge Behavior of Common Batteries. EDN Magazine, 1993.
10. O. Karahan, A. Özan, and M. Bağriyanik, “The effects of mobile battery energy storage systems on the distribution network,” Turk J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 69–74, 2021.
11. G. Alexander, and H. Anton, “Parametrization of A simplified physical battery model,” Proceedings of the 13th International Modelica Conference, Regensburg, Germany, vol. 157, 215–220, 2019.
12. W. Li et al., “Parameter sensitivity analysis of electrochemical modelbased battery management systems for lithium-ion batteries,” Appl. Energy, vol. 269, 2020.
13. P. Domingos, “A few useful things to know about machine learning,” In Commun. ACM, vol. 55, no. 10, 78–87, 2012.
14. V. Lucaferri, M. Quercio, A. Laudani, and F. Riganti Fulginei, “A review on battery model-based and data-driven methods for battery management systems,” Energies, vol. 16, no. 23, p. 7807, 2023.
15. N. Watrin, H. Ostermann, B. Blunier, and A. Miraoui, “Multiphysical lithium-based battery model for use in state-of-charge determination,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 61, no. 8, 3420–3429, 2012.
16. J. C. Forman, S. Bashash, J. L. Stein, and H. K. Fathy, “Reduction of an electrochemistry-based Li-ion battery model via quasi-linearization and Padé approximation,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 158, no. 2, 2011.
17. E. Prada, D. di Domenico, Y. Creff, J. Bernard, V. Sauvant-Moynot, and F. Huet, “A simplified electrochemical and thermal aging model of LiFePO 4 -Graphite Li-ion batteries: Power and capacity fade simulations,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 160, no. 4, A616–A628, 2013.
18. “Parametrization of a lithium- ion battery Elsa Arksand Kth Royal Institute of Technology School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health.” Available: https ://ww w.div a-por tal.o rg/sm ash/g et/di va2:1 59355 7/FUL LTEXT 02. [Accessed: Mar. 27, 2024].
19. M. Ecker, S. Käbitz, I. Laresgoiti, and D. U. Sauer, “Parameterization of a physico-chemical model of a lithium-ion battery,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 162, no. 9, A1849–A1857, 2015.
20. M. Guo, G. Sikha, and R. E. White, “Single-particle model for a lithiumion cell: Thermal behavior,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 158, no. 2, 2011.
21. A. Hales, L. B. Diaz, M. W. Marzook, Y. Zhao, Y. Patel, and G. Offer, “The cell cooling coefficient: A standard to define heat rejection from lithiumion batteries,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 166, no. 12, A2383–A2395, 2019.
22. W. Ai, L. Kraft, J. Sturm, A. Jossen, and B. Wu, “Electrochemical thermalmechanical modelling of stress inhomogeneity in lithium-ion pouch cells,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 167, no. 1, 2020.
23. F. Brosa Planella et al., “A continuum of physics-based lithium-ion battery models reviewed,” Prog. Energy, vol. 4, no. 4, 2022.
24. J. A. E. Andersson, J. Gillis, G. Horn, J. B. Rawlings, and M. Diehl, “CasADi: A software framework for nonlinear optimization and optimal control,” Math. Program. Comput., vol. 11, no. 1, 1–36, 2019.
25. M. Ahmadi, “Presentation of the new method for simultaneous estimation of the parameters and the charge situation of used batteries in hybrid vehicles,” Turk J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 103–114, 2022.
26. L. V. Raviteja, and G. Gurrala, “A review of lithium-ion battery physicsbased models,” In IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meet. (PESGM), vol. 2023, (pp. 1–5). Orlando, USA., 2023.
27. E. Miguel, G. L. Plett, M. S. Trimboli, L. Oca, U. Iraola, and E. Bekaert, “Review of computational parameter estimation methods for electrochemical models,” J. Energy Storage, vol. 44, no. B, p. 103388. ISSN 2352-152X, 2021.
28. A. A. Wang et al., “Review of parameterisation and a novel database (LiionDB) for continuum Li-ion battery models,” Prog. Energy, vol. 4, no. 3, p. 032004, 2022.
29. J. Zhou, B. Xing, and C. Wang, “A review of lithium-ion batteries electrochemical models for electric vehicles,” In, E3S Web Conf. EDP Sciences, vol. 185, 2020.
30. S. G. Marquis, V. Sulzer, R. Timms, C. P. Please, and S. J. Chapman, “An asymptotic derivation of a single particle model with electrolyte,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 166, no. 15, A3693–A3706, 2019.
31. N. Jin, D. L. Danilov, P. M. J. van den Hof, and M. C. F. Donkers, “Parameter estimation of an electrochemistry-based lithium-ion battery model using a two-step procedure and a parameter sensitivity analysis,” Int. J. Energy Res., vol. 42, no. 7, 2417–2430, 2018.
32. W. He, M. Pecht, D. Flynn, and F. Dinmohammadi, “A physics-based electrochemical model for lithium-ion battery state-of-charge estimation solved by an optimised projection-based method and moving-window filtering,” Energies, vol. 11, no. 8, 2018.
33. J. C. Forman, S. J. Moura, J. L. Stein, and H. K. Fathy, “Genetic identification and fisher identifiability analysis of the Doyle-Fuller-Newman model from experimental cycling of a LiFePO 4 cell,” J. Power Sources, vol. 210, 263–275, 2012.
34. V. Sulzer, S. G. Marquis, R. Timms, M. Robinson, and S. J. Chapman, “Python battery mathematical modelling (PyBaMM),” J. Open Res. Softw., vol. 9, no. 1, 2021.
35. T. Tranter et al., “liionpack: A Python package for simulating packs of batteries with PyBaMM,” J. Open Source Softw., vol. 7, no. 70, 2022.
36. M. Doyle, T. F. Fuller, and J. Newman, “Modeling of galvanostatic charge and discharge of the lithi um/po lymer /inse rtion cell,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 140, no. 6, 1526–1533, 1993.
37. R. Deshpande, M. Verbrugge, Y.-T. Cheng, J. Wang, and P. Liu, “Battery cycle life prediction with coupled chemical degradation and fatigue mechanics,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 159, no. 10, A1730–A1738, 2012.
38. B. Rieger, S. V. v. Erhard, K. Rumpf, and A. Jossen, “A new method to model the thickness change of a commercial pouch cell during discharge,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 163, no. 8, A1566–A1575, 2016.
39. P. Ramadass, B. Haran, P. M. Gomadam, R. White, and B. N. Popov, “Development of first principles capacity fade model for Li-ion cells,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 151, no. 2, 2004.
40. H. J. Ploehn, P. Ramadass, and R. E. White, “Solvent diffusion model for aging of lithium-ion battery cells,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 151, no. 3, 2004.
41. F. Single, A. Latz, and B. Horstmann, “Identifying the mechanism of continued growth of the solid–electrolyte interphase,” ChemSusChem, vol. 11, no. 12, 1950–1955, 2018.
42. M. Safari, M. Morcrette, A. Teyssot, and C. Delacourt, “Multimodal physics-based aging model for life prediction of Li-ion batteries,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 156, no. 3, 2009.
43. X. G. Yang, Y. Leng, G. Zhang, S. Ge, and C. Y. Wang, “Modeling of lithium plating induced aging of lithium-ion batteries: Transition from linear to nonlinear aging,” J. Power Sources, vol. 360, 28–40, 2017.
44. C.-H. Chen, F. Brosa Planella, K. O’Regan, D. Gastol, W. D. Widanage, and E. Kendrick, “Development of experimental techniques for parameterization of multi-scale lithium-ion battery models,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 167, no. 8, 2020.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Electrical Energy Storage

Journal Section

Review Article

Authors

Hakkı Yavuz This is me
0009-0007-7572-0781
Türkiye

Arda Akyıldız
0009-0004-0983-5490
Türkiye

Mehmet Onur Gulbahce ^*
0000-0002-6689-8445
Türkiye

Publication Date

June 24, 2024

Submission Date

April 7, 2024

Acceptance Date

May 13, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2024 Volume: 4 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5152/tepes.2024.24007

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA98LZ62PC

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Yavuz, H., Akyıldız, A., & Gulbahce, M. O. (2024). A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 4(2), 108-117. https://doi.org/10.5152/tepes.2024.24007

AMA

1.Yavuz H, Akyıldız A, Gulbahce MO. A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries. TEPES. 2024;4(2):108-117. doi:10.5152/tepes.2024.24007

Chicago

Yavuz, Hakkı, Arda Akyıldız, and Mehmet Onur Gulbahce. 2024. “A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries”. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 4 (2): 108-17. https://doi.org/10.5152/tepes.2024.24007.

EndNote

Yavuz H, Akyıldız A, Gulbahce MO (June 1, 2024) A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 4 2 108–117.

IEEE

[1]H. Yavuz, A. Akyıldız, and M. O. Gulbahce, “A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries”, TEPES, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 108–117, June 2024, doi: 10.5152/tepes.2024.24007.

ISNAD

Yavuz, Hakkı - Akyıldız, Arda - Gulbahce, Mehmet Onur. “A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries”. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 4/2 (June 1, 2024): 108-117. https://doi.org/10.5152/tepes.2024.24007.

JAMA

1.Yavuz H, Akyıldız A, Gulbahce MO. A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries. TEPES. 2024;4:108–117.

MLA

Yavuz, Hakkı, et al. “A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries”. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 4, no. 2, June 2024, pp. 108-17, doi:10.5152/tepes.2024.24007.

Vancouver

1.Hakkı Yavuz, Arda Akyıldız, Mehmet Onur Gulbahce. A Comprehensive Review of Physics-Based Battery Models and Comparing Different Physics-Based Models for Various Chemistries. TEPES. 2024 Jun. 1;4(2):108-17. doi:10.5152/tepes.2024.24007