Sources and links on page 126 (5)
Links embedded in the original report PDF, including citations and other references. These destinations have not been independently reviewed. Links open in a new tab.
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004225009526
- https://medium.com/@dominic.tsoi/lithium-ion-battery-manufacturing-front-to-end-6015704cc2d6
- https://xiaoweitop.com/blogs/lithium-battery-production-winding-vs-lamination-process/
- https://www.tobmachine.com/blog/solid-state-battery-production-process_b124
- https://www.capgemini.com/insights/research-library/future-of-batteries/?utm_source=linkedin&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=aie_none_static_industry_paper_Volta_foundatio&utm_campaign=other_intelligent_ins
Text on page 126
Architecture, Process, and Performance. A Comparative Framework - Prismatic Wound, Z-Stacked Cont. [2 OF 2] CELL PROCESS & COMMERCIAL IMPLICATIONS
SPONSORED CONTENT
CapEx
Winding process is twice as fast as stacking. This decreases both the equipment purchase cost and the factory floor space & conveyance. This combined with the complexity & size of the stacking equipment, net CapEx could be 3-4x more for stacking compared to winding.
Component Cost
Lamination separators have a PVDF coating to help with layer adhesion and increases the cost of the separator by 2x. This is often overlooked when cell architecture decisions.
Op Ex
Complexity of the stacking process increases failure modes and results in lower yields, higher downtime. Increased equipment count also results in need for higher number of skilled operators. This can be challenging in countries with limited talent pool.
Future Proofing
Solid state cells with oxide/ceramic based brittle electrolytes can be incompatible with winding. Investing in stacking technology would future proof companies as they transition to solid state architectures.
Source: sciencedirect, medium, xiaoweitop, tobmachine
Extracted from the PDF; charts and images may read imperfectly.
More in Industry (22)
Page 126 · 44/44