Battery Degradation and Performance

Modeling: From Fundamental Physics to Data-Driven Methods 3D Microstructural Model

Description

3D microstructure-resolved physics-based battery model of high fidelity

Pros

Appropriate for electrode design and manufacturing

Cons

Complex techniques for microstructure definition Very big computational effort

Electrochemical Model (P2D)

Equivalent Circuit Model (ECM)

Physics-based model based on porous electrode theory

Based on electrical components: resistors, capacitors and voltage sources

Insights into internal battery physics and ageing mechanisms Suitable for extrapolation

Complex parameterization and validation of internal parameters

Hybrid Models

AI Models

Combines features from different model types: e.g: P2D & AI, ECM & P2D,...

Full black-box models

Low computational effort (appropriate for μC) Simple parameterization and validation

Increase of accuracy of P2D or ECM models

Suitable to reproduce very complex phenomenon, not representable by analytic equations

Not suitable for extrapolation No insights into internal battery physics

Increase of model complexity

Not suitable for extrapolation Requires large amount of data

Source: [1] X. Lu et al., NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | (2020) 11:2079, [2] H. Tu et al., Applied Energy 329 (2023) 120289, [3] B. W et al., Energy and AI 1 (2020) 100016, [4] L. Yan et al., Energy and AI 20 (2025) 100478, [5] M. Doyle et al., Journal of the Electrochemical society, 140(6):1526–1533, 1993, [6] A. Jokar et al., Volume 327, 30 September 2016, Pages 44-55

Extracted from the PDF; charts and images may read imperfectly.