AG3 battery

AG3 battery become the most promising technology to replace lithium batteries. MIT summarizes the latest progress in solid-state battery technology.

AG3 battery (SSBs) are an emerging battery technology with high energy density that can compete with lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), which power a variety of electronic devices currently on the market. Unlike traditional lithium-ion batteries, AG3 battery have a solid ceramic electrolyte that separates the anode and cathode within the battery. In some batteries, this design can use lithium as the anode.

Before AG3 battery can be commercialized and widely used, researchers must identify cost-effective strategies to produce their individual components and develop promising battery cell designs. Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have written a review article summarizing the latest progress in the field, outlining strategies for processing solid electrolytes and electrolyte/cathode tandems that can be used in future SSB designs.

Since most past studies have focused on particle-type solid electrolytes, the 75% production cost outlined in current SSB cost forecasts is greatly overestimated because they are based on solid electrolyte processing based on high-temperature classical sintering technology. Moran Balaish, one of the researchers who conducted the study, explains: "As a result, some predictions have suggested that SSBs based on oxide solid electrolytes are too expensive to compete with LIBs if cost is the determining factor. We provide low-temperature manufacturing scenarios that affect battery assembly, suggesting that researchers report and reflect not only on the classic Arrhenius transport Li+ diagram and the electrochemical stability window, but also on new 'thermal processing budgets'.

In their paper, Rupp and her colleagues highlight that there are now ample opportunities to manufacture ceramic SSB electrolyte films at low temperatures in the size range of 1-20 μm. In addition, they suggest that existing strategies can reduce SSB production costs by avoiding expensive co-firing strategies for producing cathodes and electrolytes.

For example, if high-temperature co-firing is avoided in the design and manufacture of SSB oxide batteries, less cobalt can be used to produce cathode materials, which can help avoid future geo-socio-political resource conflicts, Rupp explains.

In the future, the alternative co-firing strategies discussed by Rupp and her colleagues may affect the competitiveness of oxide-based lithium-based AG3 battery. Furthermore, they could pave the way for further research focused on low-temperature solid batteries for electric vehicles or portable electronics.

So far, most laboratory-based research in academia has chosen to make sintered pellets as a way to test materials and assemble batteries, with only a few groups investigating alternatives, such as developing tapes and films, to accommodate realistic and competing designs of SSBs with thin and robust electrolytes. There are many historical reasons for this related to how the field has developed, however, its downside is that sintering into pellets too strongly limits the integration of said cobalt-reducing cathodes, which have undesirable form factors and high process costs, as more of these cathode materials are simply (via phase diagrams) unstable in high-temperature co-firing with electrolyte components.

The review paper authored by Rupp and her colleagues ultimately conveys a rather simple message. More specifically, it highlights the benefits of transitioning to synthetic SSB electrolytes with dimensions similar to those of classical polymer separators in LIBs. According to the researchers, such a transition would be valuable both for improving the structure of SSBs and reducing their cost, while also opening up new possibilities for integrating cathodes not made of cobalt on a larger scale.

"We were surprised that even though there is a technological need for SSB designs with thin and robust electrolytes, there is still a lack of data in the field showing that most Arrhenius plots and electrochemical windows are based on millimeter-sized sintered particles," said Juan Carlos Gonzalez-Rosillo, one of the first authors.

While several studies have highlighted the potential of SSBs with components only a few micrometers thick, few teams have so far proposed effective strategies to produce these components on a large scale. In their paper, Rupp and her colleagues propose methods that could eventually make this possible, basing their hypothesis on research evidence collected over the past few years.

Some of the questions we raise in the paper are: What methods are suitable for developing these components, and importantly, how will these methods affect the thermal processing budget to reduce costs and provide options for cathode/electrolyte components to avoid co-sintering? "Our review is a humble effort to inspire other teams to explore alternative options for manufacturing thin and robust SSBs and the electrolytes of SSBs," added Rupp. .

In future studies, the researchers plan to focus on two main aspects of SSB development. First, they hope to outline various other strategies that could be used to process cathodes and electrolytes for SSBs that do not rely on co-sintering processes.

Rupp explained: These are challenging and far more time-consuming alternatives than processes based on classic powder-to-pellet or tape routes, as there is a huge field of parameters and the optimal densification protocol while maintaining the stoichiometry of the solid chemical composition is not that simple. However, if the challenges are solved, these could provide valuable alternative manufacturing methods, which is a stepping stone towards the long-term integration of more cobalt-reduced cathode materials.

Rupp and her colleagues also plan to conduct new research exploring how to speed up the large-scale development and implementation of SSBs. Currently, it is estimated that it takes more than 10 years on average to design, develop and manufacture SSB electrolytes in a laboratory setting. Reducing the size factor of these components may require an additional 5-10 years. These excessive time periods highlight the need for faster processing technologies.

In our current research, we explore and give a view on rapid screening and rapid automated processing of ceramic compounds and their chemical compositions to test performance and iterate the best manufacturing route faster, which is not as simple as one might think, because the traditional solid-state battery processing routes in academia through powder or sintering compounds have certain complexities for rapid screening and running automated cycles. We hope to support our work with specific examples and analysis, and these potential methods are more suitable for doing rapid cycles and automated search for the best processing conditions for future solid-state battery design to manufacture components and cells.

Read recommendations:

521133 160mAh 3.7V

Why do customized lithium batteries come with protective plates?

Classification of ternary lithium ion batteries

602248 polymer battery company

3.7v 3000mah 18650 battery