Comparative Analysis of the Performance of Batteries
Fuente:
Zenodo
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Zenodo
2025
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866901844132888576 |
|---|---|
| author | Muhammed, Aniru Abudu Muhammed, Hibah Imuentinyanose |
| author_facet | Muhammed, Aniru Abudu Muhammed, Hibah Imuentinyanose |
| contents | <p>This study presents a comparative modeling and performance analysis of four major battery chemistries Lead–acid, Lithium-ion, Solid-state, and Flow using MATLAB/Simulink and Simscape. A unified equivalent circuit model (ECM), comprising an open-circuit voltage source, ohmic resistance, and two RC branches, was implemented as a baseline framework to ensure consistency across chemistries. Chemistry-specific extensions were incorporated, including the Shepherd–Peukert model for Lead–acid, a Single-Particle Model (SPM) for Lithium-ion, an extended SPM with interfacial resistance for Solid-state, and coupled tank–stack–channel dynamics for Flow batteries. Experimental OCV–SOC (Open-Circuit Voltage vs. State of Charge) data, diffusion coefficients, and kinetic parameters were integrated to enhance fidelity, while degradation sub-models such as SEI growth, Peukert aging, interfacial resistance, and electrolyte imbalance enabled lifecycle projections. Standardized test protocols comprising constant-current discharges, dynamic load cycles, temperature sweeps, and cycling tests were applied to evaluate voltage–SOC behaviour, round-trip efficiency, thermal rise, and cycle life. Results indicated that Lithium-ion and Solid-state deliver superior energy density and efficiency, Lead–acid remains cost-effective but cycle-limited, and Flow batteries achieve exceptional lifetime with scalable power–energy decoupling. The unified framework provides a reproducible methodology for battery evaluation, offering valuable insights for mobility, stationary storage, and grid-scale applications.</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_18267961 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | eng |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Comparative Analysis of the Performance of Batteries Muhammed, Aniru Abudu Muhammed, Hibah Imuentinyanose Battery modeling MATLAB/Simulink Lithium-ion Solid-state Flow battery <p>This study presents a comparative modeling and performance analysis of four major battery chemistries Lead–acid, Lithium-ion, Solid-state, and Flow using MATLAB/Simulink and Simscape. A unified equivalent circuit model (ECM), comprising an open-circuit voltage source, ohmic resistance, and two RC branches, was implemented as a baseline framework to ensure consistency across chemistries. Chemistry-specific extensions were incorporated, including the Shepherd–Peukert model for Lead–acid, a Single-Particle Model (SPM) for Lithium-ion, an extended SPM with interfacial resistance for Solid-state, and coupled tank–stack–channel dynamics for Flow batteries. Experimental OCV–SOC (Open-Circuit Voltage vs. State of Charge) data, diffusion coefficients, and kinetic parameters were integrated to enhance fidelity, while degradation sub-models such as SEI growth, Peukert aging, interfacial resistance, and electrolyte imbalance enabled lifecycle projections. Standardized test protocols comprising constant-current discharges, dynamic load cycles, temperature sweeps, and cycling tests were applied to evaluate voltage–SOC behaviour, round-trip efficiency, thermal rise, and cycle life. Results indicated that Lithium-ion and Solid-state deliver superior energy density and efficiency, Lead–acid remains cost-effective but cycle-limited, and Flow batteries achieve exceptional lifetime with scalable power–energy decoupling. The unified framework provides a reproducible methodology for battery evaluation, offering valuable insights for mobility, stationary storage, and grid-scale applications.</p> |
| title | Comparative Analysis of the Performance of Batteries |
| topic | Battery modeling MATLAB/Simulink Lithium-ion Solid-state Flow battery |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18267961 |