energies

Article
Derating Guidelines for Lithium-Ion Batteries
Yongquan Sun 1,2, *, Saurabh Saxena 2 and Michael Pecht 2
1 Institute of Sensor and Reliability Engineering (ISRE), Harbin University of Science and Technology,
Harbin 150080, China
2 Center for Advanced Life Cycle Engineering (CALCE), University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742,
USA; saxenas@umd.edu (S.S.); pecht@umd.edu (M.P.)
* Correspondence: sunyongquan@hrbust.eud.cn; Tel.: +86-451-8639-2394




Received: 29 October 2018; Accepted: 19 November 2018; Published: 26 November 2018


Abstract: Derating is widely applied to electronic components and products to ensure or extend their
operational life for the targeted application. However, there are currently no derating guidelines
for Li-ion batteries. This paper presents derating methodology and guidelines for Li-ion batteries
using temperature, discharge C-rate, charge C-rate, charge cut-off current, charge cut-off voltage, and
state of charge (SOC) stress factors to reduce the rate of capacity loss and extend battery calendar life
and cycle life. Experimental battery degradation data from our testing and the literature have been
reviewed to demonstrate the role of stress factors in battery degradation and derating for two widely
used Li-ion batteries: graphite/LiCoO2 (LCO) and graphite/LiFePO4 (LFP). Derating factors have
been computed based on the battery capacity loss to quantitatively evaluate the derating effects of
the stress factors and identify the significant factors for battery derating.

Keywords: li-ion battery; derating guidelines; derating methodology; derating factor; the rate of
capacity loss

1. Introduction
Li-ion batteries have the potential to shape global demand for fossil fuels, increase the use of
renewables in the electric grid by buffering the intermittent and fluctuating green energy supply, bring
convenient electric power to portable consumer electronics devices, and enable the broad commercial
launch of electric vehicles. However, these batteries, similar to any other engineering product, degrade
and lose capacity with aging. If the battery degradation rate can be slowed down, industry applications
will benefit significantly [1].
Derating refers to the reduction of electrical, thermal, and mechanical stresses applied to a part in
order to decrease the degradation rate and prolong the expected life of the part [2]. It is an efficient
approach to reduce the degradation rate, minimize failures, and reduce business risks, and has been
applied to almost all electronic components, including resistors, diodes, transistors, light-emitting
diodes, CPUs, and capacitors. Many derating standards or specifications have been developed for
electronic components [3]. For example, Freescale provides voltage and frequency derating guidelines
for the MPC7447A microprocessor [4], and Hitachi provides guidelines for derating of temperature,
humidity, voltage, and current for high-voltage integrated circuits [5]. These guidelines are valuable
for engineers designing products, but no guidelines are available for derating of Li-ion batteries.
Extensive research has focused on Li-ion battery degradation [6]. For example, Guan et al. [7]
investigated the capacity fade mechanisms of 4.2-V mesocarbon microbeads/LiCoO2 (LCO)
commercial cells at various rates (0.6C, 1.2C, 1.5C, 1.8C, 2.4C, and 3.0C). They concluded that the
decay in cathode and cell imbalance caused by the loss of active lithium and the polarization in the
full cell dominated the degradation during cycling. Choi and Lim [8] pointed out that high charge

Energies 2018, 11, 3295; doi:10.3390/en11123295 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2018, 11, 3295 2 of 20

cut-off voltages and a long float-charge period had the most severe effects on cycle life, but the depth of
discharge (DoD) did not affect the cycle degradation. Ning et al. [9] studied the effects of discharge rates
at three different C-rates (1C, 2C, and 3C) on 4.2-V carbon/LCO battery capacity fade and concluded
that at higher C-rates growth of the solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) layer accelerated. Wang et al. [10]
found a power law relation between capacity fade and charge throughput for 3.6-V graphite/LiFePO4
(LFP) cells under five DoDs (10–90%), five temperatures (from −30 ◦ C to 60 ◦ C) and four discharge
rates (from C/2 to 10C). Ecker et al. [11] conducted an accelerated study on carbon/Li(NiMnCo)O2
cells to analyze the influence of cycle depth and mean state of charge (SOC) on cycle aging. They
observed that rate of aging increased with increasing cycle depth (∆SOC) almost linearly. Also, they
found that for a given cycle depth, minimum aging occurred in cells cycled around 50% mean SOC.
Saxena et al. [12] studied the effects of mean SOC and ∆SOC on graphite/LiCoO2 cells and concluded
that both these factors affect the cycle life performance of batteries.
These studies highlight the major degradation mechanisms and effects of various stress factors
on battery degradation. However, the authors did not extend their findings to develop a derating
framework for Li-ion batteries. For example, Wikner et al. [13] concluded that a reduced charge level of
50% SOC increased the lifetime expectancy of the vehicle battery by 44–130%, and keeping the battery
at 15% SOC during parking and limiting the time at high SOC reduced the contribution to the calendar
aging. This paper aims to fill this research gap by reviewing the findings of some of the comprehensive
testing studies from the past and also using the data from the authors’ own experiments to provide
guidelines for battery derating.
Storage and cycling are the most common operating modes for Li-ion batteries, therefore, derating
of Li-ion batteries refers to reducing the battery degradation rate and prolonging battery life under the
two operating modes by reducing the environmental stresses and electrical stresses. Since capacity
is the most important performance metric, it is selected as the battery health indicator, based on
which the Li-ion battery derating is investigated. The remainder of the paper is organized as follows:
Section 2 defines the derating factor and discusses Li-ion battery derating for calendar life improvement;
Section 3 discusses Li-ion battery derating for cycle life improvement; Section 4 presents conclusions.

2. Derating for Calendar Life Improvement

In order to investigate the effectiveness of derating for life improvement, a metric such as derating
factor needs to be defined. A derating factor has been defined as the ratio of the difference between the
degradation rate under the derated stress and the degradation rate under the reference or maximum
design stress to the degradation rate under the reference or maximum design stress at a specific time
t [14].
DF(t) = [DRDer (t) − DRRef (t)]/DRRef (t) (1)

where DF is the derating factor, DR(t) is the degradation rate at time t, DRDer (t) and DRRef (t) are the
degradation rates under the derated stress and reference stress, respectively. DR(t) is defined as [15]

DR(t) = [QLoss (t) − QLoss (t0 )]/(t − t0 ) (2)

where QLoss (t) is the battery capacity loss at time t and t0 < t. If t0 = 0, then the capacity loss at the
beginning is 0, QLoss (t0 ) = 0. Then the derating factor can be updated as

DF(t) = [QLoss,Der (t) − QLoss,Ref (t)]/QLoss,Ref (t0 ) (3)

Therefore, where the derating factor can be used to reflect the rate of battery capacity loss
according to Equation (3), the degradation rate specifically refers to the rate of capacity loss. A low
rate of capacity loss implies a long battery life.
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 3 of 20
Energies 2018, 11, x 2 of 20

To
To show
show how
how derating
derating can
can bebe applied
applied for
for battery
battery calendar
calendar life
life improvement,
improvement, data
data from
from storage
storage
tests on LFP batteries [16] and LCO batteries are presented here.
tests on LFP batteries [16] and LCO batteries are presented here. Datasheet Datasheet parameters of the
the
investigated
investigated batteries
batteries are
are listed
listed in
in Table
Table1.1.The
Thestorage
storagetesting
testingdata
dataarearepresented
presentedin
inFigure
Figure1.1.

Table 1. Battery
Table 1. Battery specifications.
specifications.

Nominal
Nominalcapacity
Capacity Charge
Chargecut-off
Cut-Off Discharge
Discharge cut-off
Cut-Off
Chemistry
Chemistry (Ah)
(Ah) Voltage
voltage (V)(V) Voltage
voltage (V)(V)
Graphite/LFP[16]
Graphite/LFP [16] 3.03.0 3.63.6 2.02.0
Graphite/LCO
Graphite/LCO 1.51.5 4.24.2 2.75
2.75

25 20
SOC 100, 60 °C SOC 100, 50 °C
SOC 50, 60 °C 18 SOC 50, 50 °C
SOC 0, 60 °C
SOC 100, 25 °C SOC 0, 50 °C
20 16
SOC 50, 25 °C SOC 100, 25 °C
SOC 0, 25 °C 14 SOC 50, 25 °C
SOC 100, 40 °C SOC 0,25 °C

Capacity loss (%)

Capacity loss (%)

SOC 50, 40 °C 12 SOC 100, -5 °C

15 SOC 0, 40 °C
SOC 100, -40 °C
10

8
10
6

4
5 2

0 -2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 0 50 100 150 200 250
Storage time (days) Storage time (days)

(a) (b)

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Calendar life testing data. (a) LiFePO4 (LFP) batteries were tested under three temperatures temperatures
(60 ◦
(60 °C,
C, 40 ◦
40 °C,
C, and 25 °C)◦ charges (SOCs)
C) and three state of charges (SOCs) (100%,
(100%, 50%,
50%, and
and 0%)
0%) with
with an
an experiment
experiment
duration of
duration ofover
over885885days.
days.“SOC
“SOC 100,
100, ◦ C”°C”
60 60 refers
refers to LFP
to LFP batteries
batteries werewere
storedstored
at SOC at 100%
SOC and
100% ◦ C.
60and
60 °C.
The The detailed
detailed testing information
testing information can be referred
can be referred to [16].
to [16]. (b) “SOC(b) “SOC
100, ◦
50 C” 100,refers
50 °C” refersbatteries
to LCO to LCO
batteries
were storedwere stored
at SOC 100% at and
SOC50100%◦ C inand 50 °C in achamber.
a temperature temperature chamber.
All batteries All batteries
underwent underwent
capacity testing
capacity
and testingmeasurement
impedance and impedance every 3measurement
weeks. Capacity every
and3impedance
weeks. Capacity and impedance
characterization: Batteries
were constant charged
characterization: at a were
Batteries rate ofconstant
C/2 to 4.2 V, then
charged at constant
a rate ofvoltage
C/2 to charged untilconstant
4.2 V, then the current fell
voltage
below
charged C/100
untilrate. The batteries
the current were
fell below discharged
C/100 rate. Theat batteries
a rate of C/2
weretodischarged
2.75 V to measure
at a rate the deliverable
of C/2 to 2.75 V
maximum
to measurecapacity. Then, the
the deliverable batteriescapacity.
maximum were fully charged
Then, using the
the batteries weresame constant
fully charged current constant
using the same
voltage (CCCV) profile followed an impedance measurement.
constant current constant voltage (CCCV) profile followed an impedance measurement.

The
The capacity
capacitylosses
lossesunder
undervarious temperatures
various at 885
temperatures days
at 885 for for
days LFPLFPcellscells
and and
at 140
atdays for LCO
140 days for
cells ◦
LCOare plotted
cells in Figure
are plotted 2a. The
in Figure 2a.reference temperatures
The reference for LFP
temperatures for cells
LFP and
cells LCO cells cells
and LCO are 60areC60and
°C
50 ◦ C, respectively, then the curves of derating of temperature are plotted in Figure 2b.
and 50 °C , respectively, then the curves of derating of temperature are plotted in Figure 2b.
 Energies 2018, 11, x 3 of 20
Energies 2018,11,
Energies2018, 11,3295
x 43ofof20
20

50 0
50 LFP cells, SOC 100 0
45 LFP
LFP cells,
cells, SOC
SOC 100
50
45 LFP cells,
LFP cells, SOC
SOC 50
0 -0.2
40 LFP
LCOcells,
cells,SOC
SOC0100 -0.2
40 LCO cells,
LCO cells, SOC
SOC 100
50
LCO
LCO cells,
cells, SOC
SOC 50
0
35 -0.4
LCO cells, SOC 0
35 -0.4
(%)

factor
30
(%)

factor
30 -0.6
loss

-0.6
loss

25

Derating
Capacity

25

Derating
Capacity

20 -0.8
20 -0.8
15 LFP cells, SOC 100
15 -1 LFP
LFP cells,
cells, SOC
SOC 100
50
10 -1 LFP
LFP cells,
cells, SOC
SOC 50
0
10 LFP
LCOcells,
cells,SOC
SOC0100
5 -1.2 LCO
-1.2 LCO cells,
cells, SOC
SOC 100
50
5 LCO
LCO cells,
cells, SOC
SOC 50
0
0 LCO cells, SOC 0
0 -1.4
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 -1.425 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
25 30 35 Temperature
40 45(°C) 50 55 60 25 30 35 Temperature
40 45(°C) 50 55 60
Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C)
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 2. Derating of temperature for calendar life. (a) Capacity loss vs. temperature. (b) Derating
Figure2.2.Derating
Deratingofoftemperature
temperaturefor
forcalendar
calendarlife.
life.(a)
(a)Capacity
Capacityloss
loss vs.temperature.
temperature. (b) Derating
Figure
factor vs. temperature. The derating factors were calculated accordingvs.to Equation (3). (b) Derating
factor vs. temperature. The derating factors were calculated according to Equation
factor vs. temperature. The derating factors were calculated according to Equation (3). (3).
The derating factor declines against the decreasing temperature. For example, the derating
Thederating
The derating factor declines against the decreasing temperature. For example, the derating
factors reached atfactor least declines
–0.6 for LCOagainst the decreasing
batteries and –0.5temperature. For example,
for LFP batteries the derating
by derating factors
the temperature
factors reached
reached − at0.6least –0.6 for LCO batteries
− and –0.5 batteries
for LFP batteries by derating the temperature◦
to 25 °C, as shown in Figure 2b. The negative derating factors indicate the decreasing of the 25
at least for LCO batteries and 0.5 for LFP by derating the temperature to rateC,
of
toshown
as 25 °C, in
asFigure
shown2b. in The
Figure 2b. The
negative negative
derating derating
factors factors
indicate the indicate theofdecreasing
decreasing the rate of of the rate
capacity of
loss
capacity loss according to Equation (3). Therefore, the temperature can be derated to reduce the rate
capacity loss
according according
to loss
Equation (3).toTherefore,
Equation the (3).temperature
Therefore, the temperature can be derated to reduce the rate
of capacity and prolong battery calendar life. can be derated to reduce the rate of capacity loss
of capacity
and prolong loss andcalendar
battery prolong life.
battery calendar life.
Calendar life can also be improved by derating the SOC. The capacity losses at 140 days under
Calendarlife
Calendar lifecancanalso
alsobe beimproved
improvedby byderating
deratingthethe SOC.The Thecapacity
capacitylosses
losses at 140days
daysunder
under
50 °C and 25 °C for LCO cells, and the capacity losses at SOC.
885 days under 60 °C andat25140 °C for LFP cells
50 ◦
50 °C and25 ◦
25 °C forLCO LCOcells,
cells, andthe
thecapacity
capacitylosses
lossesatat885
885 daysunder ◦
under 60 °C and25 ◦
25 °C forLFP
LFPcells
cells
areCplotted
and inC Figure
for 3a. Oneand hundred percent SOC wasdays
selected as60theCreference
and CSOC,
for then the
areplotted
are plottedinin Figure
Figure 3a.
3a.SOC
One One hundred percent
hundred SOC was selected as the reference SOC, then the
curves of derating of are plottedpercent SOC
in Figure 3b.was selected as the reference SOC, then the curves
ofcurves of derating
derating of SOC are of SOC
plottedare in
plotted
Figurein3b.
Figure 3b.

50 0
50 25 °C, LCO cells 0
45 25
50 °C,
°C, LCO
LCO cells
cells
45 25 °C,
50 °C, LCO
LFP cells
cells
25
60 °C,
°C, LFP
LFP cells
cells -0.2
40 -0.2
40 60 °C, LFP cells
35
35 -0.4
(%)

-0.4
factor

30
(%)

factor

30
loss
loss

25
Derating

-0.6
Capacity

25
Derating

-0.6
Capacity

20
20
15 -0.8
15 -0.8
10
10 LCO cells, 25 °C
-1 LCO
LCO cells,
cells, 25
50 °C
°C
5 -1
5 LCO cells, 25
LFP cells, 50 °C
°C
LFP
LFP cells,
cells, 25
60 °C
°C
0
-1.2 LFP cells, 60 °C
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 -1.2 0 20 40 60 80 100
0 20 40 SOC (%)60 80 100 0 20 40 SOC (%)60 80 100
SOC (%) SOC (%)
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure3.3.Derating
Figure Derating ofof
SOCSOCforfor calendar
calendar life.life. (a) Capacity
(a) Capacity lossloss vs. SOC.
vs. SOC. (b) Derating
(b) Derating factorfactor vs. SOC,
vs. SOC, and
Figure 3. Derating of SOC for calendar life. (a) Capacity loss vs. SOC. (b) Derating factor vs. SOC,
and
the the derating
derating factorsfactors are calculated
are calculated according
according to Equation
to Equation (3). (3).
and the derating factors are calculated according to Equation (3).
The derating factor declines against the decreasing SOC, so the SOC can be derated to reduce
The derating factor declines against the decreasing SOC, so the SOC can be derated to reduce
the rate of capacity loss and prolong the battery calendar life. As shown in Figure 3b, LCO batteries
the rate of capacity loss and prolong the battery calendar life. As shown in Figure 3b, LCO batteries
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 5 of 20

The derating factor declines against the decreasing SOC, so the SOC can be derated to reduce
the rate of capacity loss and prolong the battery calendar life. As shown in Figure 3b, LCO batteries
exhibited two distinct derating modes depending on temperature. One was that the derating factor
was largely reduced to around −0.90 by derating the SOC from 100% to 50%, and then slightly went to
about −0.97 by derating the SOC to 0% under high temperature (such as 50 ◦ C). The other was that the
derating factor was slightly reduced to around −0.20 by derating the SOC from 100% to 50%, and then
sharply went to around −1.20 by derating the SOC to 0% under room temperature. The study implies
that the rate of capacity loss can be decreased by derating the SOC to 50% under high temperature for
LCO batteries. However, the rate of capacity loss for LFP batteries is only slightly declined by derating
the SOC to 50% under high temperature.
In summary, temperature is the most significant parameter to derate to prolong battery calendar
life. The rate of capacity loss can be significantly reduced by derating the temperature under various
SOCs, but the rate of capacity loss only can be reduced slightly by derating the SOC under certain
conditions. It can be observed from the derating analysis that room temperature suffices to be a good
condition for storage as it does not require any additional cooling requirement than the already installed
infrastructure. Li-ion batteries are electrochemical systems and hence reducing the temperature to
room temperature positively affect their operation and degradation. SEI layer formation and growth,
which consumes active lithium and reduces capacity, is considered a major mechanism affected by
temperature [17,18]. When the temperature is derated to room temperature, the SEI layer formation
and growth is inhibited, hence the rate of capacity loss can be reduced significantly. From the point of
view of cost, room temperature storage is an easy condition for industries to maintain.
However, if temperature control is not possible in certain application or operation condition,
then SOC is an important factor that can help in reducing degradation. At high temperature such as
50 ◦C and beyond, reducing SOC can significantly reduce the degradation for both LCO and LFP and
can result in extended calendar life. Hence, SOC is also an important derating factor and should be
considered if there is a possibility of high temperature.

3. Derating for Cycle Life Improvement

Batteries are charged and discharged multiple times in an application. As battery voltage, current,
and temperature can vary by a large extent during the cycling, the number of stress factors involved
in battery cycling are expectedly more than that for battery storage. Therefore, this study uses seven
LFP and LCO battery data sets to investigate derating of five kinds of relevant stresses including
temperature, discharge C-rate, charge C-rate, charge cut-off current, and charge cut-off voltage [19–22].
Two battery models were selected for LCO batteries and LFP batteries, respectively. The relationship
between the battery samples and derated stresses is presented in Table 2. The detailed battery
specifications, testing procedures, and testing conditions can be found in corresponding references,
and a summary is provided in Table 3.
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 6 of 20

Table 2. Battery samples and derated stresses [19–22].

Derated Stresses Chemistry Battery Levels of Derated Stresses

A 10 ◦ C, 25 ◦ C, 45 ◦ C, 60 ◦ C
LCO
B 25 ◦ C, 45 ◦ C, 50 ◦ C, 55 ◦ C
Temperature
G 45 ◦ C, 30 ◦ C
LFP
P 29.2 ◦ C, 35.6 ◦ C, 52.8 ◦ C
A 0.7C, 1.0C, 2.0C
LCO
O 1C, 1.1C, 1.3C, 1.5C, 2.0C
Discharge C-rate
G C/3, 4C
LFP
P 1C, 3.75C
J 1A (0.91C), 3A, 5A (4.5C)
LCO
O 1C, 1.2C, 1.4C
Charge C-rate K 1A (0.91C), 3A, 5A (4.5C)
LFP G C/3, 1.5C
P 1C, 3.75C
A C/5, C/40
Charge cut-off current LCO
O 0 min, 28 min, 53 min, 100 min
LCO J 4.15 V, 4.1 V, 4.05 V, 4.0 V, 3.9 V
Charge cut-off voltage
LFP K 3.65 V, 3.6 V, 3.55 V, 3.5 V, 3.4 V
Energies 2018, 11, 3295
Battery Battery Specifications
Normal capacity: 3.36 Ah
A Cut-off voltage: 4.4 V/3.0 V
Positive electrode: LCO
Negative electrode: graphite
B Normal capacity:1.8 Ah
[19] Cut-off voltage: 4.2 V/2.0 V
Positive electrode: LCO
Negative electrode: carbon
Nominal capacity: 11 Ah
G Cut-off voltage: 3.65 V/2.0 V
[20]
Positive electrode: LFP
Negative electrode: graphite
J Nominal capacity: 1.1 Ah
[20] Cut-off voltage: 4.1 V/2.5 V
Positive electrode: LiNiCoMnO2 + LCO
Negative electrode: graphite
Table 3. Battery specification and testing information.
Stress
Temperature:
25 ◦ C, 45 ◦ C, 60 ◦ C
Charge cut-off current:
C/5, C/40
Discharge constant current:
0.7C, 1.0C, 2.0C
Temperature:
25 ◦ C, 45 ◦ C, 50 ◦ C, 55 ◦ C
Temperature: 45 ◦ C, 30 ◦ C
Charge C-rate: 1.5C, C/3
Discharge C-rate: 4C, C/3
Charge C-rate: 1 A, 3 A, 5 A
Charge cut-off voltage:
4.15 V, 4.1 V, 4.05 V, 4.0 V, 3.9 V
7 of 20
Testing Procedures and Conditions
Charge: CC 1.5C to 4.2 V, CV to 1C, then CC 1C to 4.4 V, CV to Ccut-off
Discharge: CC C
discharge to 3.0 V
Charge cut-off current (Ccut-off): C/5, C/40
Discharge constant current (Cdischarge): 0.7C, 1.0C, 2.0C
Charge: CC 1 A to 4.2 V, CV to 50 mA; discharge: CC 1 A to 2.0 V under 25 ◦ C, 45 ◦ C,
50 ◦ C, and 55 ◦ C.
(1) Charge CC C/3 to 3.65 V, then CV to C/10; discharge CC C/3 to 2.0 V under 45 ◦ C.
(2) Charge CC C/3 to 3.65 V, then CV to C/10; discharge CC 4C to 2.0 V under 30 ◦ C.
(3) Charge CC 1.5C to 3.65 V, then CV to C/10; discharge CC C/3 to 2.0 V under 30 ◦ C.
(4) Charge CC C/3 to 3.65 V, then CV to C/10; discharge CC 4C to 2.0 V under 45 ◦ C.
(5) Charge CC 1.5C to 3.65 V, then CV to C/10; discharge CC C/3 to 2.0 V under 45 ◦ C.
(6) Charge, CC 1.5C to 3.65 V, then CV to C/10; discharge CC 4C to 2.0 V under 30 ◦ C.
Charge CC 1/3/5 A to 4.1 V, then CV to 100 mA; discharge CC 3 A to 2.5 V under 25 ◦ C.
Charge CC 3 A to CV, then CV to 100 mA; discharge CC 3 A to 2.5 V under 25 ◦ C.
Energies 2018, 11, 3295
Battery Battery Specifications
K Nominal capacity: 1.1 Ah
[21] Cut-off voltage: 3.6 V/2.0 V
Positive electrode: LFP
Negative electrode: graphite
Rated capacity: 900 mAh
O Cut-off voltage: 4.2 V/2.75 V
[8] Positive electrode: LCO
Negative electrode: graphite
Rated capacity: 2.3 Ah
P Manufacturer: A123 Systems
[22]
Positive electrode: LFP
Negative electrode: graphite
8 of 20
Table 3. Cont.
Stress Testing Procedures and Conditions
Charge C-rate: 1 A, 3 A, 5 A Charge CC 1/3/5 A to 3.6 V, then CV to 100 mA; discharge: CC 3 A to 2.0 V under 25 ◦ C.
Charge cut-off voltage: Charge CC 3 A to CV, then CV to 100 mA; discharge CC 3 A to 2.0 V under 25 ◦ C.
3.65 V, 3.6 V, 3.55 V, 3.5 V, 3.4 V
CV charge period: Charge CC 1C to 4.2V, CV hold thp ; discharge CC 1C to 2.75 V under 25 ◦ C.
0 min, 28 min, 53 min, 100 min
Charge C-rate: Charge CC to 4.2 V, CV hold 2.5 h; discharge CC 1C to 2.75 V under 25 ◦ C.
1C, 1.2C, 1.4C
Discharge C-rate: Charge CC 1C to 4.2 V, CV to 90 mA; discharge CC to 2.75 V under 25 ◦ C.
1C, 1.1C, 1.3C, 1.5C, 2.0C
Temperature: (1) Charge CC 1C to SOC 100%; discharge CC 1C to SOC 0% under 23.5 ◦ C.
(2) Charge CC 1C to SOC 100%; discharge CC 1C to SOC 0% under 32.5 ◦ C.
Charge C-rate:
(3) Charge CC 2C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 2C to SOC 0% under 26.1 ◦ C.
1C, 3.75C
(4) Charge CC 2C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 2C to SOC 0% under 34.4 ◦ C.
Discharge C-rate: (5) Charge CC 2C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 2C to SOC 0% under 46.9 ◦ C.
1C. 3.75C (6) Charge CC 3.75C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 3.75C to SOC 0%, under 29.2 ◦ C.
(7) Charge CC 3.75C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 3.75C to SOC 0%, under 35.6 ◦ C.
(8) Charge CC 3.75C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 3.75C to SOC 0%, under 52.8 ◦ C.
(9) Charge CC 1C to SOC 100%; discharge CC 3.75C to SOC 0% under 34.1 ◦ C.
(10) Charge CC 1C to SOC 100%; discharge CC 3.75C to SOC 0% under 25.0 ◦ C.
(11) Charge CC 1C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 3.75C to SOC 0% under 46.6 ◦ C.
(12) Charge CC 3.75C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC 1C to SOC 0% under 33.5 ◦ C.
(13) Charge CC 3.75C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC to SOC 0% under 23.3 ◦ C.
(14) Charge CC 3.75C to SOC 100%; discharge: CC to SOC 0% under 46.7 ◦ C.
 Energies 2018, 11, x 0 of 20
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 9 of 20

3.1. Cycle Life Improvement by Temperature Derating

3.1. Cycle Life Improvement by Temperature Derating
Cycle life can be improved by derating the temperature. For example, batteries A and B with
Cycle life can
LCO positive be improved
electrode by derating
and batteries the
G and P temperature.
with For
LFP positive example,
electrode batteries
were A and
employed to Bpresent
with
LCO positive electrode and batteries G and P with LFP positive electrode were employed
the derating of temperature for cycle life. The testing data are presented in Figure 4. to present
the derating of temperature for cycle life. The testing data are presented in Figure 4.

80
RM, 1A/1A
45°C, 1A/1A
70 50°C, 1A/1A
55°C, 1A/1A

60

Capacity loss (%)

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Cycles
(a) (b)

25 30
30 °C, C/3, 3.65 V, 4C, 2.0 V
30 °C, 1.5C, 3.65 V, C/3, 2.0 V
30 °C, C/3, 3.95 V, C/3, 2.0 V
45 °C, C/3, 3.65 V, 4C, 2.0 V 25
20
45 °C, 1.5C, 3.65 V, C/3, 2.0 V
45 °C, C/3, 3.95 V, C/3, 2.0 V
20
Capacity loss (%)
Capacity loss (%)

15

15

10
10 23.5 °C, 1C/1C
26.1 °C, 2C/2C
29.2 °C, 3.75/3.75
5 32.5 °C, 1C/1C
5 34.4 °C, 2C/2C
35.6 °C, 3.75/3.75
46.9 °C, 2C/2C
52.8 °C, 3.75/3.75
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 5 10 15 20
Cycles kAh

(c) (d)

Figure4.4.Battery
Figure Batterycycle
cycledegradation
degradationdatadataunder
undervarious
varioustemperatures.
temperatures.(a) (a)Capacity
Capacitylosslossvs.
vs.cycles
cyclesfor
for
batteryA,
battery A,“25 ◦
“25 °C, C/5, 0.7C” refers
C, C/5, refers to
to charge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent
currentC/5,
C/5,charge
charge C-rate
C-rate 0.7C
0.7Cunder
under 2525 ◦
°C. C.
(b)
Capacity
(b) Capacity loss
lossvs.
vs.cycles
cyclesfor
forbattery
batteryB,B, “RM,
“RM, 1 A/1
A/1 A”
A” refers toto charge/discharge
charge/discharge current
current11AAunder
under
roomtemperature.
room temperature.(c) (c)Capacity
Capacityloss
lossvs.
vs.cycles
cyclesfor
forbattery “30◦ C,
batteryG,G,“30 °C,C/3,
C/3,3.65
3.65V, V,4C,
4C,2.0
2.0V”
V”refers
referstoto
cells charged constant current (CC) C/3 to 3.65 V, discharged CC 4C to 2.0
cells charged constant current (CC) C/3 to 3.65 V, discharged CC 4C to 2.0 V under 30 C. (d) Capacity V ◦
under 30 °C. (d)
Capacity
loss vs. totalloss vs. total
capacity capacity throughput
throughput for“23.5
for battery P, ◦
battery
C, P, “23.5 °C,
1C/1C” 1C/1C”
refers refers to charge/discharge
to charge/discharge C-rate 1C
under 1C ◦under
C-rate23.5 C. The23.5 °C. The degradation
degradation is presentedisaspresented
a functionasofa function of total
total capacity capacity throughput
throughput over
over the entire
the entire
cycle cycle
life, the unitlife, the unit is kiloampere
is kiloampere hour (kAh).hour (kAh).

The
Thehighest
highesttemperatures
temperatures were selected
were as the
selected as reference temperature
the reference for each
temperature for group, which which
each group, were
◦ C for A, 55 ◦ C for B, 45 ◦ C for G, and 52.8 ◦ C and 46.9 ◦ C for P. The curves of capacity loss vs.
60were 60 °C for A, 55 °C for B, 45 °C for G, and 52.8 °C and 46.9 °C for P. The curves of capacity loss
temperature are shown
vs. temperature in Figure
are shown 5a,c, and
in Figure the curves
5a and of derating
c, and the factor
curves of vs. temperature
derating are presented
factor vs. temperature are
inpresented
Figure 5b,d. Derating
in Figure factors
5b and were computed
d. Derating usingcomputed
factors were the capacity lossthe
using data presented
capacity in Figure
loss data 5a,c
presented
according
in Figure to
5aEquation (3).
and c according to Equation (3).
Energies 2018,11,
Energies2018, 11,3295
x 101 of
of20
20

80 0
B cell, 500 cycles B cell, 500 cycles
A cell, 200 cycles, C/5, 0.7C -0.1 A cell, 200 cycles, C/5, 0.7C
70 A cell, 200 cycles, C/40, 0.7C A cell, 200 cycles, C/40, 0.7C
A cell, 200 cycles, C/5, 1C A cell, 200 cycles, C/5, 1C
A cell, 200 cycles, C/40, 1C -0.2
A cell, 200 cycles, C/40, 1C
60 A cell, 200 cycles, C/5, 2C A cell, 200 cycles, C/5, 2C
A cell, 200 cycles, C/40, 2C -0.3 A cell, 200 cycles, C/40, 2C
Capacity loss (%)

Derating factor
50
-0.4

40 -0.5

-0.6
30
-0.7
20
-0.8
10
-0.9

0 -1
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C)

(a) (b)

30
P cell, 5kAh, 1C/1C
P cell, 5kAh, 2C/2C
25 P cell, 5kAh, 3.75C/3.75C
G cell, 60 cycles, C/3, 3.65V, 4C, 2 V
G cell, 60 cycles, 1.5C, 3.65V, C/3, 2 V
20
Capacity loss (%)

15

10 (d)

0
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Temperature (°C)

(c) (d)

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Derating
Derating of
of temperature.
temperature. (a)
(a) and
and (c)
(c) are
are for
for capacity
capacity loss
loss vs.
vs. temperature,
temperature, (b)
(b) and
and (d)
(d) are
are for
for
derating factor vs. temperature.
derating factor vs. temperature.

The
The capacity
capacityloss lossdecreases
decreaseswith withreducing
reducing temperature
temperature as as
shown
shown in Figure 5a,c.5aThe
in Figure and derating
c. The
factor
deratingdeclines
factor with the with
declines decreasing temperature.
the decreasing As shown
temperature. As in Figure
shown 5b,d, the
in Figure 5b derating
and d, the factor got
derating
down
factortogota value
downbetween
to a value −0.60 and −
between 0.95 and
–0.60 when derating
–0.95 whenthe temperature
derating from abovefrom
the temperature 45 ◦ C to around
above 45 °C
to ◦around
25 C. So, temperature can be employed
25 °C. So, temperature can beasemployed
an effective as parameter
an effective toparameter
reduce theto rate of capacity
reduce the rateloss
of
and prolong
capacity lossbattery
and prolongcycle life. From
battery the life.
cycle point of view
From of degradation
the point of view ofmechanisms, high temperature
degradation mechanisms, high
can acceleratecan
temperature SEI accelerate
layer growth SEIandlayercause
growthelectrolyte decomposition
and cause electrolyte and degradationand
decomposition of other battery
degradation
components
of other battery [23].components
Additionally, [23].cycling-induced cracks in the SEI
Additionally, cycling-induced layer
cracks in provide new provide
the SEI layer sites for new
the
generation
sites for the andgeneration
growth of and the SEI
growthlayerof[24].the The
SEI degradation
layer [24]. The mechanisms
degradation also demonstrate
mechanisms that also
battery life canthat
demonstrate be prolonged
battery lifeby cycling
can under a lower
be prolonged temperature
by cycling under acondition. The data also
lower temperature shows that
condition. The
both
data LCO and LFP
also shows batteries
that exhibited
both LCO and LFPsimilar derating
batteries behaviors,
exhibited so there
similar is little
derating differencesobetween
behaviors, there is
LCO
little and LFP batteries
difference between from
LCO the
andpoint
LFPofbatteries
view of from
derating temperature.
the point of view of derating temperature.
Furthermore,
Furthermore, the the derating
derating effect
effect ofof temperature
temperature was was influenced
influenced by by discharge
discharge C-rate
C-rate and
and charge
charge
cut-off
cut-off current.
current. The The derating
deratingof oftemperature
temperatureisisinfluenced
influencedby bycharge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent,
current, asas presented
presented in
in Figure
Figure 6a,6a,andandthethe derating
derating factor
factor reached
reached about
about –0.65−0.65
underunder
C/5 C/5
charge charge cut-off
cut-off current,
current, and
and went
went
downdown to around
to around –0.90−under
0.90 under
C/40 C/40
charge charge
cut-offcut-off current
current by derating
by derating the the temperature.
temperature. So
So the
the temperature
temperature cancanbe be derated
derated under
under variouscharge
various chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent
currentlevels.
levels. In In addition, derating of of
temperature was slightly influenced by the discharge C-rate according to a
temperature was slightly influenced by the discharge C-rate according to a small variation around small variation around 0.05
on
0.05derating factor factor
on derating when discharge C-rate changes
when discharge from 0.7from
C-rate changes C to 20.7
C, C
asto
presented in Figure 6b.
2 C, as presented Therefore,
in Figure 6b.
Energies2018,
Energies 2018,11,
11,3295
x 112of
of20
20

Therefore, irrespective of other parameters, reduction of temperature enables derating of Li-ion

irrespective
batteries to of otherthe
reduce parameters, reduction
rate of capacity lossofunder
temperature
variousenables derating of Li-ion batteries to reduce
conditions.
the rate of capacity loss under various conditions.

-0.65 -0.65
discharge C-rate 0.7C
-0.7 discharge C-rate 1C -0.7
Derating factor of temperature

Derating factor of temperature

discharge C-rate 2C

-0.75 -0.75

-0.8 -0.8

-0.85 -0.85

-0.9 -0.9

-0.95 -0.95 charge cut-off current C/5

charge cut-off current C/40
-1 -1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.5 1 1.5 2
Charge cut-off current (C) Discharge C-rate (C)
(a) (b)

Figure 6.
Figure 6. The
The effects
effectsofofcharge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent
currentand
anddischarge
dischargeC-rate onon
C-rate derating of temperature.
derating (a)
of temperature.
Derating factor of temperature vs. charge cut-off current; (b) Derating factor
(a) Derating factor of temperature vs. charge cut-off current; (b) Derating factor ofof temperature vs.
dischargeC-rate.
discharge C-rate.

The
The temperature
temperature cancan be
be derated
derated toto prolong
prolong battery
battery life,
life, and
and itit is
is more
more sensitive
sensitive than
than charge
charge
cut-off
cut-offcurrent
currentand
anddischarge
dischargeC-rate parameters
C-rate parameters in in
terms of derating.
terms However,
of derating. However,cooling techniques
cooling are
techniques
necessary to reduce
are necessary temperature
to reduce duringduring
temperature cyclingcycling
operation and canand
operation leadcan to additional cost. Besides,
lead to additional cost.
the feasibility
Besides, of deploying
the feasibility this equipment
of deploying for temperature
this equipment derating derating
for temperature is variable due to specific
is variable due to
application conditions.
specific application conditions.

3.2.
3.2. Cycle
Cycle Life
Life Improvement
Improvementby
byDischarge
DischargeC-Rate
C-RateDerating
Derating
Cycle
Cycle life
life can
can also
also bebeimproved
improved by byderating
derating the
thedischarge
dischargeC-rate.
C-rate. Batteries
Batteries A A and
and O O with
with LCO
LCO
positive electrode and batteries G and P with LFP positive electrode have been employed
positive electrode and batteries G and P with LFP positive electrode have been employed to present to present the
derating of the discharge C-rate for cycle life. The testing data of batteries O, G,
the derating of the discharge C-rate for cycle life. The testing data of batteries O, G, and P are and P are presented in
Figure 7a–c.inThe
presented testing
Figure 7a, bdata
andofc.battery A aredata
The testing presented in Figure
of battery 4a.
A are presented in Figure 4a.
As
As shown in Figure 7a and b, the capacity losses of batteries G
shown in Figure 7a,b, the capacity losses of batteries O and O increased against cycles
and G increased againstoverall.
cycles
The minimum
overall. cycles were
The minimum 450were
cycles for battery
450 forObattery
and 60O for
andbattery
60 forG.battery
As shown
G. Asinshown
Figure in7c,Figure
the capacity
7c, the
losses of battery
capacity losses ofP also increased
battery P alsoagainst totalagainst
increased capacitytotal
throughout,
capacity the minimumthe
throughout, testing time is testing
minimum 3 kAh.
The capacity
time is 3 kAh. losses at 200 cycles for battery A, at 450 cycles for battery O, at 60 cycles for battery
G, and at capacity
The 3 kAh capacity
losses at throughput
200 cycles for
for battery
battery PA,are
at plotted in Figure
450 cycles 8a,c.O,
for battery The reference
at 60 discharge
cycles for battery
C-rates were 2 C, 2 C, 4 C, and 3.75 C for batteries A, O, G, and P, respectively.
G, and at 3 kAh capacity throughput for battery P are plotted in Figure 8a and c. The reference Then the derating
factors were
discharge computed
C-rates wereaccording
2 C, 2 C, 4toC,Equation
and 3.75(3)C and are shown
for batteries A,inO,Figure
G, and8b,d.
P, respectively. Then the
derating factors were computed according to Equation (3) and are shown in Figure 8b and d.
Energies2018,
Energies 2018,11,
11,3295
x 123 of
of 20
20

50 20
1.0 C 45 °C, C/3, 3.65 V, C/3, 2.0 V
18 45 °C, C/3, 3.65 V, 4C, 2.0 V
1.1 C 30 °C, 1.5C, 3.65 V, C/3, 2.0 V
40 1.3 C 16 30 °C, 1.5C, 3.65 V, 4C, 2.0 V
1.5 C
14
2.0 C

Capacity loss (%)

Capacity loss (%)

30 12

10

20 8

10 4

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 50 100 150 200
Cycles Cycles

(a) (b)

30

25

20
Capacity loss (%)

15

10
23.3 °C, 3.75C/1C
29.2 °C, 3.75C/3.75C
33.5 °C, 3.75C/1C
5 35.6 °C, 3.75C/3.75C
46.7 °C, 3.75C/1C
52.8 °C, 3.75C/3.75C
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Capacity throughput (kAh)

(c)

Figure 7.
Figure 7. Battery
Battery cycle
cycle degradation
degradation data
data under
under various
various discharge
discharge C-rates.
C-rates. (a)
(a) Battery
Battery O O charged
charged CC
CC
1C to
1C to 4.2
4.2 V, constant voltage
V, constant voltage (CV)
(CV) to
to90
90mA,
mA,discharged
dischargedCC CCtoto2.75 VV
2.75 under
under 2525
°C.◦ C.
(b)(b)
Battery G. (c)
Battery G.
Battery P.
(c) Battery P.

The study
The study shows
shows that
that the
the li-ion
li-ion battery
battery life
life cannot
cannot always
always be be extended
extended by by derating
derating discharge
discharge
C-rate. The
C-rate. Thederating
deratingfactor
factorofofbattery
battery AA that
that cycling
cycling below
below ◦
45 45 °C and
C and at C/40
at C/40 charge
charge cut-off
cut-off current,
current, and
andderating
the the derating
factorfactor of battery
of battery P that cycling
P that cycling ◦ C were
below 30below 30 °C were
bigger bigger
than 0 whenthanderating
0 whendischarge
derating
discharge
C-rate, C-rate,inasFigure
as shown shown in Figure
8b,d, which 8b and d,that
implied which implied of
the derating that the derating
discharge C-rateofincreased
dischargetheC-rate
rate
increased
of capacitythe rate
loss, andofshortened
capacity theloss,battery
and shortened
cycle life. the
Thisbattery cycletolife.
is contrary theThis is contrary
traditional to the
knowledge
traditional
that knowledge
Li-ion battery thatbeLi-ion
life can battery
prolonged bylife can be prolonged
reducing the discharge by C-rate
reducing the
[25]. dischargedegradation
Therefore, C-rate [25].
Therefore,
tests shoulddegradation
be conductedtests
first should
to makebe conducted
sure first C-rate
the discharge to make cansure the discharge
be derated C-rate
to prolong canlife
battery be
derated
before to prolong
derating battery lifeC-rate.
the discharge before derating the discharge C-rate.
Energies 2018,11,
Energies2018, 11,3295
x 134ofof20
20

80 0.2
A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, C/5
A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, C/40 0.1
70 A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, C/5
A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, C/40
0
60 A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, C/5
A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, C/40
O cell, 450 cycles, 25 °C -0.1
Capacity loss (%)

50

Derating factor
-0.2
40
-0.3
30 A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, C/5
-0.4
A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, C/40
20 A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, C/5
-0.5 A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, C/40
A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, C/5
10 -0.6 A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, C/40
O cell, 450 cycles, 25 °C
0 -0.7
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Discharge C-rate (C) Discharge C-rate (C)

(a) (b)

30 3

2.5
25
G cell, 60 cycles, C/3, 3.65 V, discharge C-rate, 2.0 V 2 G cell, 60 cycles, C/3, 3.65V, discharge C-rate, 2.0 V
G cell, 60 cycles, 1.5C, 3.65 V, discharge C-rate, 2.0 V G cell, 60 cycles, 1.5C, 3.65V, discharge C-rate, 2 .0 V
20 P cell, 3kAh, 3.75C(35.6 °C) / 1C(33.5 °C) P cell, 3kAh, 3.75C(35.6 °C) / 1C (33.5 °C)
Capacity loss (%)

1.5
Derating factor

P cell, 3kAh, 3.75C(29.2 °C) / 1C(23.3 °C) P cell, 3kAh, 3.75C(29.2 °C) / 1C (23.3 °C)
P cell, 3kAh, 3.75C(52.8 °C) / 1C(46.7 °C) P cell, 3kAh, 3.75C(52.8 °C) / 1C (46.7 °C)
15 1

0.5
10
0

5
-0.5

0 -1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Discharge C-rate (C) Discharge C-rate (C)

(c) (d)

Figure8.8.Derating
Figure Deratingof ofdischarge
discharge C-rate.
C-rate. (a,c)
(a) and
are(c)
forare for capacity
capacity loss vs.loss vs. discharge
discharge C-rate,C-rate, (b) for
(b,d) are and
(d) are for derating factor vs. discharge C-rate. (a) “A cell, 200 ◦
cycles, 25 °C, C/5” refers
derating factor vs. discharge C-rate. (a) “A cell, 200 cycles, 25 C, C/5” refers to the capacity loss of to the capacity
loss of A
battery battery
at 200A at 200
cycles under ◦ C and
cycles25under 25charge
°C andcut-off
chargecurrent
cut-offC/5.
current C/5.cell,
(c) “G (c) 60
“Gcycles,
cell, 60C/3,
cycles,
3.65C/3,
V,
3.65 V, discharge
discharge C-rate,
C-rate, 2.0 2.0 V”
V” means themeans theloss
capacity capacity loss G
of battery ofatbattery G atthe
60 cycles, 60battery
cycles, charged
the battery charged
at constant
at constant
current current
C/3 to 3.65 V,C/3
andtodischarged
3.65 V, andtodischarged to 2.0
2.0 V. “P cell, V. “P
3 kAh, cell,(35.6
3.75C 3 kAh,◦ C)/1C (35.6◦°C)/1C
3.75C(33.5 C)” refers(33.5
to °C)”
the
capacity loss of battery P at capacity throughput 3 kAh, the battery discharged at 3.75C under 35.6 ◦ C,
refers to the capacity loss of battery P at capacity throughput 3 kAh, the battery discharged at 3.75C
under
and 35.6 °C, and
discharged under 33.5at◦ C.
at 1Cdischarged 1C under 33.5 °C.

IfIfderating
deratingthethe
discharge
dischargeC-rate has a positive
C-rate role in prolonging
has a positive battery life,battery
role in prolonging when the temperature
life, when the
istemperature
uncontrollable, then the discharge
is uncontrollable, thenC-rate can be derated
the discharge to can
C-rate prolong battery life.
be derated However,
to prolong there are
battery life.
many limitations when derating the discharge C-rate. For example, the
However, there are many limitations when derating the discharge C-rate. For example, thedischarge C-rate is mostly
determined by practical
discharge C-rate application
is mostly determinedrequirements,
by practicaltherefore,
applicationby reducing the discharge
requirements, therefore,C-rate, some
by reducing
performance
the dischargecapability is limited.
C-rate, some performance capability is limited.
The
Thederating
deratingfactor
factorresults
resultsdid
didnot
notexhibit
exhibitmuch
muchdifferences
differenceson onLCO
LCObattery
batteryand
andLFP
LFPbattery
battery
derating
deratingbehaviors.
behaviors.BothBothLCOLCObatteries’
batteries’and
andLFP
LFPbatteries’
batteries’life
lifenot
notonly
onlycan
canbebeextended
extendedby byderating
derating
discharge
dischargeC-rate,
C-rate,butbutalso
alsocancanbebereduced.
reduced. ItIt indicates
indicates that
that it’s
it’sunreasonable
unreasonable to toderate
deratedischarge
discharge
C-rate
C-ratejust
justaccording
accordingtotothetheelectrode
electrodechemistries.
chemistries.Actually,
Actually,notnotonly
onlythe
thechemistries
chemistriesbut
butalso
alsoother
other
components,
components,such suchasaselectrolytes
electrolytesandandseparators,
separators,determine
determinethetheLi-ion
Li-ionbattery
batteryderating
deratingbehaviors.
behaviors.

3.3. Cycle Life Improvement by Charge C-Rate Derating

Cycle life can also be improved by derating the charge C-rate. For example, batteries J and O
with LCO positive electrode and battery K with LFP positive electrode were employed to present the
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 14 of 20

3.3. Cycle Life Improvement by Charge C-Rate Derating

Energies 2018, 11, x 5 of 20
Cycle life can also be improved by derating the charge C-rate. For example, batteries J and O
with LCOofpositive
derating charge electrode
C-rate forand battery
cycle life. K with
The LFP positive
testing data areelectrode wereinemployed
represented Figure 9. to present
The the
derating
derating ofvary
behaviors charge
whenC-rate for cycle
derating life. The
the charge testing
C-rate, data are represented
as presented in Figure 10.in Figure 9. The derating
behaviors vary when derating the charge C-rate, as presented in Figure 10.

30 80
J cell, 1A (0.9C)
J cell, 3A (2.7C)
1C
J cell, 5A (4.5C) 70 1.2 C
25
K cell, 1A (0.9C) 1.4 C
K cell, 3A (2.7C) 60
K cell, 5A (4.5C)
20

Capacity loss (%)

Capacity loss (%)

50

15 40

30
10

20
5
10

0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 100 200 300 400 500
Cycles Cycles
(a) (b)

25 30
45 °C, 1.5C, 3.65 V, C/3, 2.0 V
45 °C, C/3, 3.65 V, C/3, 2.0 V
30 °C, 1.5C, 3.65 V, 4C, 2.0 V
25
20 30 °C, C/3, 3.65 V, 4C, 2.0 V

20
Capacity loss (%)

Capacity loss (%)

15

15

10
10
29.2 °C, 3.75C/3.75C
25 °C, 1C/3.75C
5 35.6 °C, 3.75C/3.75C
5 34.1 °C, 1C/3.75C
52.8 °C, 3.75C/3.75C
46.6 °C, 1C/3.75C
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Cycles Capacity throughput (kAh)

(c) (d)

Figure 9. Battery cycle degradation data under various charge C-rates. (a) “J cell, 1 A (0.9C)” refers to
battery J charged CC 1 A (0.9C) to 4.1 V,
V, CV
CV toto 100
100 mA
mA (C/11),
(C/11), and
and finally
finally discharged CC 3 A (2.7C) to
◦ C. “K
2.5 V under temperature 25 °C. “K cell,
cell, 11 A
A (0.9C)”
(0.9C)” refers
refers to
to battery
battery K K charged
charged CC
CC 11 A
A(0.9C)
(0.9C)toto3.6
3.6V,
V,
then CV to 100 mA; discharge: CC 33 A (2.7C) to 2.0 V under 25 ◦
°C. (b) Battery O charged CC
A (2.7C) to 2.0 V under 25 C. (b) Battery O charged CC to 4.2 V, to 4.2 V,
CV hold 2.5 h, discharged CC 1C to 2.75 V under temperature
temperature 25 25 ◦°C. (d) Battery
C. (c) Battery G. (d) Battery P.
P.
Energies 2018,11,
Energies2018, 11,3295
x 156ofof20
20

60 J cell, 1200 cycles, 25 °C J cell, 1200 cycles, 25 °C

Kcell, 700 cycles, 25 °C Kcell, 700 cycles, 25 °C
O cell, 450cycles, 25 °C 1 O cell, 450cycles, 25 °C
50 G cell, 60cycles, charge C-rate, 3.65 V, 4C, 2 V, 30 °C G cell, 60cycles, charge C-rate, 3.65 V, 4C, 2 V, 30 °C
G cell, 60cycles, charge C-rate, 3.65 V, C/3, 2 V, 45 °C G cell, 60cycles, charge C-rate, 3.65 V, C/3, 2 V, 45 °C
P cell, 5kAh, 1C(34.1 °C) / 3.75C(35.6 °C) P cell, 5kAh, 1C(34.1 °C) / 3.75C(35.6 °C)
Capacity loss (%)

40 P cell, 5kAh, 1C(25.0 °C) / 3.75C(29.2 °C) 0.5 P cell, 5kAh, 1C(25.0 °C) / 3.75C(29.2 °C)

Derating factor
P cell, 5kAh, 1C(46.6 °C) / 3.75C(52.8 °C) P cell, 5kAh, 1C(46.6 °C) / 3.75C(52.8 °C)

30
0

20

-0.5
10

0 -1
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Charge C-rate (C) Charge C-rate (C)
(a) (b)

Figure10.
Figure 10.Derating
Deratingof
ofcharge
chargeC-rate.
C-rate.(a)
(a)Capacity
Capacityloss.
loss.(b)
(b)Derating
Deratingfactor.
factor.

Thestudy
The studyindicates
indicatesthatthatbatteries
batteriesexhibit
exhibittwo
twoopposite
oppositederating
deratingmodes:
modes:one oneisisthat
thatthe
thederating
derating
factordeclines
factor declineswith
withthethedecreasing
decreasing charge
charge C-rate,
C-rate, suchsuch as for
as for batteries
batteries K, OK,and
O and
G, andG, the
andother
the other
is thatis
thatderating
the the derating
factorfactor increases
increases with with the decreasing
the decreasing chargecharge C-rate.
C-rate. For For example,
example, the the derating
derating factor
factor of
of battery P that cycling below ◦ 30 °C reached 1.30 by derating the charge C-rate
battery P that cycling below 30 C reached 1.30 by derating the charge C-rate from 3.75C to 1C, which from 3.75C to 1C,
which implies
implies that thethat
rate the rate of capacity
of capacity loss increased.
loss increased. This implies
This feature feature that
implies that degradation
degradation tests shouldtests
should
be be conducted
conducted to make sureto make
charge sure charge
C-rate can C-rate can to
be derated beprolong
deratedbattery
to prolong battery
life before life before
derating the
derating the
charge C-rate. charge C-rate.
IfIfthe
thetemperature
temperature is uncontrollable,
is uncontrollable, thenthen the charge
the charge C-rateC-rate
can becan be considered
considered to deratetotoderate
prolong to
prolonglife.
battery battery
As we life. As we
know, know,
a high a high
charge charge
C-rate C-rateshortens
sharply sharplytheshortens the time,
charging charging time, therefore,
therefore, derating
derating
of the chargeof the charge
C-rate C-rate
leads leads to increasing
to increasing charging
charging time, time,
results resultscomplaints.
in users’ in users’ complaints.

3.4.
3.4.Cycle
CycleLife
LifeImprovement
Improvementby
byCharge
ChargeCut-Off
Cut-OffCurrent
CurrentDerating
Derating
Cycle
Cyclelife
lifecan
canbebeimproved
improvedby byderating
deratingthe
thecharge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent.
current.For
Forexample,
example,battery
batteryAAwith
with
LCO
LCOpositive
positiveelectrode
electrodewaswasemployed
employedto present the derating
to present of theofcharge
the derating C-rateC-rate
the charge for cycle
forlife under
cycle life
four temperature levels with charge cut-off current C/5 and C/40. The testing data can
under four temperature levels with charge cut-off current C/5 and C/40. The testing data can be seen be seen in
Figure 4a. The
in Figure capacity
4a. The losses
capacity under
losses various
under charge
various cut-off
charge current
cut-off are computed
current usingusing
are computed testingtesting
data
and
dataplotted in Figure
and plotted 11a. C/40
in Figure 11a.was
C/40selected as the reference
was selected condition.
as the reference The derating
condition. of the charge
The derating of the
cut-off
chargecurrent
cut-off is presented
current in Figurein11b.
is presented Figure 11b.
Energies 2018,11,
Energies2018, 11,3295
x 167ofof20
20

80 0
A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, 0.7C
A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, 1C -0.1
70
A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, 2C
A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, 0.7C
-0.2
60 A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, 1C
A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, 2C
A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, 0.7C -0.3
Capacity loss (%)

50

Derating factor
A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, 1C
A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, 2C -0.4
40
-0.5 A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, 0.7C
A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, 1C
30 A cell, 200 cycles, 25 °C, 2C
-0.6
A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, 0.7C
20 A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, 1C
-0.7 A cell, 200 cycles, 45 °C, 2C
A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, 0.7C
10 -0.8 A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, 1C
A cell, 200 cycles, 60 °C, 2C
0 -0.9
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Charge cut-off current (C) Charge cut-off current (C)

(a) (b)

Figure11.
Figure 11.Derating
Deratingof
ofcharge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent.
current.(a)
(a)Capacity
Capacityloss
lossvs.
vs.charge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent.
current.(b)
(b)Derating
Derating
factorvs.
factor vs.charge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent.
current.

The
The capacity
capacity loss decreased with with the
theincreasing
increasingcharge
chargecut-off
cut-offcurrent
current under
under 6060°C,◦ C, whereas
whereas the
the capacity
capacity lossloss almost
almost keptkept constant
constant under
under 25 °C ◦
25andC and
45 °C, ◦
45asC, as shown
shown in Figure
in Figure 11a.derating
11a. The The derating
factor
factor declines
declines with with the increasing
the increasing charge
charge cut-off
cut-off current,
current, butbutitsitsdecreasing
decreasingtrendtrend varies
varies depending
depending on on
temperature.
temperature.UnderUndertemperatures
temperatures below
below ◦
45 45C, °C,
the derating factorfactor
the derating slightly reached
slightly −0.15 when
aroundaround
reached –0.15
derating the charge
when derating thecut-off
charge current to current
cut-off C/5, whereas
to C/5, when the temperature
whereas when the was 60 ◦ C, the was
temperature derating factor
60 °C, the
wend down
derating to −
factor 0.75. down
wend Therefore, the charge
to –0.75. Therefore,cut-off
the current can becurrent
charge cut-off deratedcan under high temperature
be derated under high
(60 ◦ C), rather(60
temperature than under
°C), rathertemperatures below 45 ◦ C, to
than under temperatures reduce
below the to
45 °C, rate of capacity
reduce the rateloss
of and prolong
capacity loss
and prolong
battery battery life,
life, as presented as presented
in Figure in Figurethe
11b. In addition, 11b. In addition,
discharge C-ratethe
has discharge C-rate
little influence has little
on derating
influence
of the charge on cut-off
derating of the so
current, charge cut-off
derating current,
of the charge socut-off
derating of thecan
current charge cut-off under
be applied current can be
various
applied under
discharge various discharge C-rates.
C-rates.
Charge cut-off
Charge cut-off current
current should
should bebe derated
derated under
under highhigh temperature
temperature (such (such as 60 ◦°C).
as 60 At high
C). At high
temperature,the
temperature, therate
rate
of of capacity
capacity lossloss canreduced
can be be reduced significantly
significantly by derating
by derating the cut-off
the charge chargecurrent.
cut-off
current. However,
However, when the temperature
when the temperature was below was 45 ◦ C,below 45 of
the rate °C,capacity
the rateloss
of was
capacity lossreduced.
slightly was slightly
reduced.
3.5. Cycle Life Improvement by Charge Cut-Off Voltage Derating
3.4. Cycle LifeJ with
Battery Improvement by Charge
LCO positive Cut-offand
electrode Voltage Derating
battery K with LFP positive electrode were employed
to present theJ derating
Battery with LCO ofpositive
charge cut-off voltage
electrode for cycle
and battery K life.
withTheLFPcapacity
positiveloss vs. cycles
electrode wereofemployed
battery J
and K are plotted
to present in Figure
the derating 12a,b, respectively.
of charge cut-off voltage for cycle life. The capacity loss vs. cycles of battery J
and K are plotted in Figure 12a and b, respectively.
 Energies 2018, 11, x 8 of 20
Energies 2018, 11, x3295 8 of
17 of 20
20

30 30
30 4.15 V 30 3.65 V
4.10VV
4.15 3.60VV
3.65
4.05VV
4.10 3.55VV
3.60
25 4.00VV
4.05 25 3.50VV
3.55
25 3.90VV
4.00 25 3.40VV
3.50
3.90 V 3.40 V
20 20

Capacity loss (%)

Capacity loss (%)

20 20

Capacity loss (%)

Capacity loss (%)

15 15
15 15

10 10
10 10

5 5
5 5

0 0
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
0 200 400 Cycles
600 800 1000 0 100 200 300 400Cycles
500 600 700 800 900
Cycles Cycles
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 12. Battery cycle degradation data under various charge cut-off voltages. (a) “4.15 V” refers to
Figure 12. Battery
Battery cycle
cycle degradation data under various charge cut-off voltages. (a) “4.15
“4.15 V”
V” refers to
Figure
battery12.J charged at CCdegradation
3 A (2.7C) todata
4.15 under
V, thenvarious charge
CV to 100 mAcut-off
(C/11),voltages.
and finally (a)discharged refers
at CCto3
battery
battery J charged at CC 3 A (2.7C) to 4.15 V, then CV to 100 mA (C/11), and finally discharged at CC 3
A to 2.5J charged
V underat25CC °C.3(b)
A (2.7C) to 4.15
“3.65 V” refersV, to
then CV toK100
battery mA (C/11),
charged at CC 3and finallytodischarged
A (2.7C) at CC
3.65 V, then CV 3to
A to
A100 2.5
to 2.5 V under 25 °C.
◦ (b) “3.65 V” refers to battery K charged at CC 3 A (2.7C) to 3.65 V, then CV to
mAV(C/10),
underand
25 finally
C. (b) “3.65 V” refers
discharged to battery
at CC K charged
3 A (2.7C) to 2.0 Vatunder
CC 3 25
A (2.7C)
°C. to 3.65 V, then CV to
100
100 mA
mA (C/10),
(C/10),and
andfinally
finallydischarged
discharged at at CC
CC 33 AA (2.7C)
(2.7C) to
to 2.0
2.0 V
V under
under 2525 °C.
◦ C.

The capacity loss vs. charge cut-off voltage of battery J and K are plotted in Figure 13(a). The
The capacity loss
loss vs.
vs.charge
charge cut-offvoltage
voltageofof battery J and K are plotted in Figure
13a.13(a). The
rated voltages, 4.1 V for battery Jcut-off battery
and 3.6 V for battery J and
K, are K are
selectedplotted in Figure
as the reference The rated
conditions. The
rated voltages,
voltages, 4.1 V 4.1
for V for
battery battery
J and J
3.6and
V 3.6
for V for
battery battery
K, are K, are
selected selected
as the as the
referencereference conditions.
conditions. The The
derating
derating of charge cut-off voltage is presented in Figure 13(b).
derating
of chargeofcut-off
charge cut-offisvoltage
voltage is presented
presented in Figure in Figure 13(b).
13b.

30 1.5
30 J cell, 630 cycles 1.5 J cell, 630 cycles
K cell,
J cell, 630900 cycles
cycles K cell,
J cell, 630900 cycles
cycles
K cell, 900 cycles K cell, 900 cycles
25
25
1
1
20
Capacity loss (%)

Derating factor

20
Capacity loss (%)

Derating factor

15 0.5
15 0.5

10
10
0
0
5
5

0 -0.5
0 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 -0.5 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2
3.4 3.5 3.6 Charge
3.7 cut-off
3.8 voltage
3.9 (V)4 4.1 4.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 Charge
3.7 cut-off
3.8 voltage
3.9 (V)4 4.1 4.2
Charge cut-off voltage (V) Charge cut-off voltage (V)
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure13.
Figure 13.Derating
Deratingofofcharge
chargecut-off
cut-offvoltage.
voltage.(a)
(a)Capacity
Capacityloss
lossvs.
vs.cut-off
cut-offvoltage.
voltage.(b)
(b)Derating
Deratingfactor
factor
Figure 13. Derating of charge cut-off voltage. (a) Capacity loss vs. cut-off voltage. (b) Derating factor
vs.cut-off
vs. cut-offvoltage.
voltage.
vs. cut-off voltage.
The
Thecapacity
capacity loss increases
increases with
withthe
thegrowing
growingcharge
chargecut-off
cut-off voltage,
voltage, as as shown
shown in Figure
in Figure 13a.13a.
The
The The capacity
derating loss
factor increases
declines with the growing charge cut-off voltage, as shown in Figure 13a. The
derating factor declines withwith
the the decreasing
decreasing charge
charge cut-off
cut-off voltage
voltage overall,
overall, so the
so the raterate of capacity
of capacity loss
derating
loss factor declines with the decreasing charge voltage.
cut-off voltage overall,
and so the ratesimilar
of capacity loss
can can be reduced
be reduced by by lowering
lowering thethe chargecut-off
charge cut-off Batteries
voltage. Batteries JJ and K exhibit
exhibit similarderating
derating
can be
behaviorreduced
as by
shown lowering
in Figure the
13b. charge cut-off
However, thevoltage.
rate of Batteries
capacity J
lossandis K exhibit
accelerated similar
when derating
batteries
behavior as shown 13b. However, the rate of capacity loss is accelerated when batteries are
behavior
are cycledasbeyond
shown in Figure 13b. However, thebatteries
rate of capacity loss be
is accelerated when batteries are
cycled beyond the the
rated rated voltage.
voltage. Sobatteries
So the the shouldshould
not benot used above
used above the charge
the rated rated charge
cut-off
cycled
cut-off beyond
voltage. the rated voltage. So the batteries should not be used above the rated charge cut-off
voltage.
voltage.
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 18 of 20

Charge cut-off voltage can be employed to reduce the rate of capacity loss, whereas the rate of
capacity loss is accelerated when increasing the charge cut-off voltage. In terms of derating the charge
cut-off voltage, from the point of view of open-circuit voltage (OCV)–SOC curves, a small variation
of the OCV leads to a large change of SOC [26]. The charge cut-off voltage determines battery OCV
by a subtraction of voltage drop of internal resistance, and finally determines the SOC. Derating the
charge cut-off voltage by a small variation will cause the charge capacity to decline a lot, resulting in a
shortage of available energy and discharging time for one cycle.
In summary, temperature, charge cut-off voltage, and charge cut-off current can be derated to
reduce the rate of capacity loss under various cycling conditions. However, the effects of derating the
temperature are stronger than the effects of derating the charge cut-off voltage. The effects of derating
the charge cut-off current varied depending on temperature. Under 60 ◦ C, the rate of capacity loss
can be severely reduced (with derating factor −0.82) by derating the charge cut-off current, whereas
under temperatures below 45 ◦ C, the rate of capacity loss slightly reduced (with derating factor −0.10).
The cycle life is not always prolonged by derating the charge/discharge C-rate under certain specific
situations. For example, the rate of capacity loss increased (with derating factor 2.75) by derating the
discharge C-rate for battery P under low temperature, and by derating the charge C-rate, the rate of
capacity loss increased (with derating factor 1.33) under temperature 25 ◦ C. Therefore, to prolong
battery cycle life, temperature could be considered as the most sensitive parameter to derate.

4. Conclusions
The degradation behavior of two widely used Li-ion batteries, graphite/LCO and graphite/LFP,
was reviewed under calendar life and cycle life conditions to propose derating methodology and
guidelines. Even for the same chemistry of Li-ion battery, different manufacturers use different designs
and additives to reduce cost and enhance the performance of their batteries. Hence a strict derating
regime cannot be applied across all manufacturers. This article is the first to present the methodology
for selecting stress factors and guidelines for Li-ion battery derating.
Both temperature and SOC can be derated to reduce the rate of capacity loss for LCO and LFP
batteries and extend their calendar life. While temperature in general is a more significant factor
compared to SOC for calendar life derating, the criticality and effectiveness of SOC as a derating
factor cannot be ignored at high temperature (50 ◦C or above). Hence, temperature control should
be primarily used for derating to extend battery calendar life. Additionally, temperature control may
be a more costly exercise compared to controlling the SOC, so if high temperature cannot be avoided
during battery storage, then SOC derating must be implemented to extend battery calendar life.
In terms of battery cycle life, temperature is also the most significant parameter that can be derated
to reduce the rate of capacity loss under various cycling conditions. The order of stress factors in
terms of their significance for cycle life derating is as follows, taking the derating effects and practical
limitations into account: temperature > charge/discharge C-rate > charge cut-off current > charge
cut-off voltage. Charge C-rate and discharge C-rate should be carefully derated because the rate of
battery capacity loss may be increased. Charge cut-off current is an effective derating parameter only
at high temperature. Charge cut-off voltage can be derated to reduce the rate of capacity loss, but not
beyond the rated voltage.
For any battery in industry application, stress factors for calendar life improvement and cycling
life improvement should be identified first, then the batteries should be tested under different levels of
stress factors using a statistical design of experiment (DOE) to accurately calculate the derating factors
corresponding to each stress factor, and then the stress factors to be used for derating should be chosen
based on the tradeoffs between ease of controllability and the magnitude of the derating factor.

Author Contributions: Y.S. and M.P. conceived and designed the research; Y.S. and S.S. analyzed the testing data;
Y.S., S.S. and M.P. wrote the paper.
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 19 of 20

Funding: This research was also funded by University Nursing Program for Young Scholars with Creative
Talents in Heilongjiang Province (UNPYSCT-2017087), and Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province
(QC2016068).
Acknowledgments: The authors are supported by the Center for Advanced Life Cycle Engineering (CALCE) at
the University of Maryland, which is funded by more than 150 companies and organizations concerned with
electronics reliability and safety. The authors thank Cheryl Wurzbacher for editing and comments to improve the
paper’s quality.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Du, J.; Zhang, X.; Wang, T.; Song, Z.; Yang, X.; Wang, H.; Wu, X. Battery degradation minimization oriented
energy management strategy for plug-in hybrid electric bus with multi-energy storage system. Energy 2018,
165, 153–163. [CrossRef]
2. Instructions for EEE Parts Selection, Screening, Qualification and Derating (EEE-INST-002). Available
online: https://nepp.nasa.gov/docuploads/FFB52B88-36AE-4378-A05B2C084B5EE2CC/EEE-INST-002_
add1.pdf (accessed on 22 November 2018).
3. Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid Batteries
for Stationary Applications (IEEE 1188). Available online: https://standards.ieee.org/project/1188.html
(accessed on 20 November 2018).
4. Freescale Semiconductor. MPC7447AECS01AD Specification. 7 November 2018. Available online: https:
//www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/MPC7447AECS01AD.pdf (accessed on 7 November 2018).
5. Hitachi. Instructions for Use of Hitachi High-Voltage Monolithic ICs. 7 November 2018. Available
online: http://www.hitachi-power-semiconductor-device.co.jp/en/products/ic/pdf/Instructions_for_
Use_EN.pdf (accessed on 7 November 2018).
6. Yang, F.; Wang, D.; Zhao, Y.; Tsui, K.L.; Bae, S.J. A study of the relationship between coulombic efficiency
and capacity degradation of commercial lithium-ion batteries. Energy 2018, 145, 486–495. [CrossRef]
7. Guan, T.; Zuo, P.; Sun, S.; Du, C.; Zhang, L.; Cui, Y.; Wang, F. Degradation mechanism of LCO/mesocarbon
microbeads battery based on accelerated aging tests. J. Power Sources 2014, 268, 816–823. [CrossRef]
8. Choi, S.S.; Lim, H.S. Factors that affect cycle-life and possible degradation mechanisms of a Li-ion cell based
on LiCoO2 . J. Power Sources 2002, 111, 130–136. [CrossRef]
9. Ning, G.; Haran, B.; Popov, B.N. Capacity fade study of lithium-ion batteries cycled at high discharge rates.
J. Power Sources 2003, 117, 160–169. [CrossRef]
10. Wang, J.; Liu, P.; Hicks-Garner, J.; Sherman, E.; Soukiazian, S.; Verbrugge, M.; Finamore, P. Cycle-life model
for graphite-LFP cells. J. Power Sources 2011, 196, 3942–3948. [CrossRef]
11. Ecker, M.; Nieto, N.; Käbitz, S.; Schmalstieg, J.; Blanke, H.; Warnecke, A.; Sauer, D.U. Calendar and cycle life
study of Li (NiMnCo) O2-based 18650 lithium-ion batteries. J. Power Sources 2014, 248, 839–851. [CrossRef]
12. Saxena, S.; Hendricks, C.; Pecht, M. Cycle life testing and modeling of graphite/LiCoO2 cells under different
state of charge ranges. J. Power Sources 2016, 327, 394–400. [CrossRef]
13. Wikner, E.; Thiringer, T. Extending Battery Lifetime by Avoiding High SOC. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1825.
[CrossRef]
14. IEEE Standard Procedure for the Determination of the Ampacity Derating Factor for Fire-Protected
Cable Systems. (IEEE Std 848-2015). Available online: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?
tp=&arnumber=7111195 (accessed on 20 November 2018).
15. Peng, W.; Li, Y.F.; Yang, Y.J.; Mi, J.; Huang, H.Z. Bayesian degradation analysis with inverse Gaussian process
models under time-varying degradation rates. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 2017, 66, 84–96. [CrossRef]
16. Naumann, M.; Schimpe, M.; Keil, P.; Hesse, H.C.; Jossen, A. Analysis and modeling of calendar aging of a
commercial LiFePO 4/graphite cell. J. Energy Storage 2018, 17, 153–169. [CrossRef]
17. Rodrigues, M.T.F.; Sayed, F.N.; Gullapalli, H.; Ajayan, P.M. High-temperature solid electrolyte interphases
(SEI) in graphite electrodes. J. Power Sources 2018, 381, 107–115. [CrossRef]
18. Ploehn, H.J.; Ramadass, P.; White, R.E. Solvent diffusion model for aging of lithium-ion battery cells. J.
Electrochem. Soc. 2004, 151, A456–A462. [CrossRef]
19. Ramadass, P.; Haran, B.; White, R.; Popov, B.N. Capacity fade of Sony 18650 cells cycled at elevated
temperatures: Part I. Cycling performance. J. Power Sources 2002, 112, 606–613. [CrossRef]
Energies 2018, 11, 3295 20 of 20

20. Li, Z.; Lu, L.; Ouyang, M.; Xiao, Y. Modeling the capacity degradation of LiFePO4/graphite batteries based
on stress coupling analysis. J. Power Sources 2011, 196, 9757–9766. [CrossRef]
21. Keil, P.; Jossen, A. Charging protocols for lithium-ion batteries and their impact on cycle life—An
experimental study with different 18650 high-power cells. J. Energy Storage 2016, 6, 125–141. [CrossRef]
22. Groot, J.; Swierczynski, M.; Stan, A.I.; Kær, S.K. On the complex ageing characteristics of high-power
LiFePO4/graphite battery cells cycled with high charge and discharge currents. J. Power Sources 2015, 286,
475–487. [CrossRef]
23. Liu, G.; Lu, W. A Model of Concurrent Lithium Dendrite Growth, SEI Growth, SEI Penetration and Regrowth.
J. Electrochem. Soc. 2017, 164, A1826–A1833. [CrossRef]
24. Deshpande, R.; Verbrugge, M.; Cheng, Y.T.; Wang, J.; Liu, P. Battery cycle life prediction with coupled
chemical degradation and fatigue mechanics. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2012, 159, A1730–A1738. [CrossRef]
25. Guan, T.; Sun, S.; Yu, F.; Gao, Y.; Fan, P.; Zuo, P.; Yin, G. The degradation of LiCoO2/graphite batteries at
different rates. Electrochim. Acta 2018, 279, 204–212. [CrossRef]
26. Birkl, C.R.; McTurk, E.; Roberts, M.R.; Bruce, P.G.; Howey, D.A. A parametric open circuit voltage model for
lithium ion batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2015, 162, A2271–A2280. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).