Battery-Intelligence-Lab / SLIDE

SLIDE is C++ code that simulates degradation of lithium ion cells. It extends the single particle model with various degradation models from literature. Users can select which degradation models they want to use for a given simulation.
Other
113 stars 34 forks source link

Discrepancy in cycling data #26

Open taranjitsinghb opened 1 year ago

taranjitsinghb commented 1 year ago

Hi, First of all thank you, I have been using SLIDE to simulate degradation data and it has been insightful for our research. I am using SLIDE in WSL.

I am using the branch SLIDE_v2. I am only using the following functions in main.cpp (with the default degradation parameter settings and using KokamNMC)

" estimateOCVparameters(); ProfileAgeing(M, pref, deg, cellType, settings::verbose); // simulates a bunch of drive cycle degradation experiments

"

In degradation.cpp, I only changed the following parameters from default (in ProfileAgeing - see image below) 1 second for the data. I didnt change anything checkup parameters elsewhere.

" image

"

After simulating, obtaining results, if I just look at the few discharge cycles data (UDDS 0-100 @ 25), especially current, I integrate them considering nominal capacity, I obtain SoC which seems perfect as below:

image

However, if I look into whole data, discharge, charge and checkup, I have trouble obtaining SoC, which shows I might have some issues in currents when I integrate them assuming time steps as one seconds. See below, the first 2.5e5 samples.

image

So my question is, where does this discrepancy comes from ? my assumption of one second ? if yes then what sample time shall I use, or where can I change the sample time for every other entities (checkup, charging) to make sure the SoC is respected.

Or there is something entirely different than onesecond assumption?

Kind regards, Taranjit

ElektrikAkar commented 1 year ago

Hi Taranjit,

I am sorry for late reply. Thank you very much. This looks interesting, I will have a look and let you know hopefully next week :)

Yours sincerely, Volkan

taranjitsinghb commented 1 year ago

Hi Taranjit,

I am sorry for late reply. Thank you very much. This looks interesting, I will have a look and let you know hopefully next week :)

Yours sincerely, Volkan

Thanks Volkan,

Regards, Taranjit

wjh346 commented 1 month ago

Hi, First of all thank you, I have been using SLIDE to simulate degradation data and it has been insightful for our research. I am using SLIDE in WSL.

I am using the branch SLIDE_v2. I am only using the following functions in main.cpp (with the default degradation parameter settings and using KokamNMC)

" estimateOCVparameters(); ProfileAgeing(M, pref, deg, cellType, settings::verbose); // simulates a bunch of drive cycle degradation experiments

"

In degradation.cpp, I only changed the following parameters from default (in ProfileAgeing - see image below) 1 second for the data. I didnt change anything checkup parameters elsewhere.

" image

"

After simulating, obtaining results, if I just look at the few discharge cycles data (UDDS 0-100 @ 25), especially current, I integrate them considering nominal capacity, I obtain SoC which seems perfect as below:

image

However, if I look into whole data, discharge, charge and checkup, I have trouble obtaining SoC, which shows I might have some issues in currents when I integrate them assuming time steps as one seconds. See below, the first 2.5e5 samples.

image

So my question is, where does this discrepancy comes from ? my assumption of one second ? if yes then what sample time shall I use, or where can I change the sample time for every other entities (checkup, charging) to make sure the SoC is respected.

Or there is something entirely different than onesecond assumption?

Kind regards, Taranjit image

Hello! I think you are quite skilled in using SLIDE, so I would like to ask you a question. I uncommented the aging mode in main function and added CycleAgeing, why did I report an error that CycleAgeing could not find the identifier