The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Analysis and modeling of calendar aging of a commercial LiFePO4/graphite cell
Open accessAbstract
Abstract This paper presents a comprehensive calendar aging study on a lithium-ion battery with a test duration of 29 months. This aging study was realized with a widely used commercial LiFePO4/graphite cell from Sony/Murata, which promises both long calendar and cycle lifetime, which is especially required for stationary battery applications. The development of the cells’ capacity, as well as the resistances, are shown in a static calendar aging study for 17 test points, each with 3 cells, having constant storage conditions of temperature and state of charge. Based on the measurement data, a semi-empirical aging model is presented for the capacity loss and resistance increase, consisting of only 5 parameters which are valid for all storage conditions. An additional dynamic calendar aging study is performed with 9 months test duration for model validation, consisting of 15 test points with varying conditions of temperature and state of charge. The absolute model errors against the validation data points remain below 2.2% for the capacity loss and below 6.9% for the resistance increase for all dynamic validation tests. In conclusion, this calendar aging model allows the prognosis of the calendar lifetime of LiFePO4/graphite batteries in different applications with varying storage conditions over time.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A review on lithium-ion battery ageing mechanisms and estimations for automotive applications
Barré, A., Deguilhem, B., Grolleau, S., Gérard, M., Suard, F., & Riu, D. (2013) · Journal of Power Sources · doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.05.040 · Cited by 1,758
Calendar Aging of Lithium-Ion Batteries: I. Impact of the Graphite Anode on Capacity Fade
Keil, P., Schuster, S. F., Wilhelm, J., Travi, J., Hauser, A., Karl, R. C., & Jossen, A. (2016) · Journal of The Electrochemical Society · doi:10.1149/2.0411609jes · Cited by 669
Self-citationSarasketa-Zabala, E., Gandiaga, I., Rodriguez-Martinez, L. M., & Villarreal, I. (2014) · Journal of Power Sources · doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.08.051 · Cited by 293
Prada, E., Di Domenico, D., Creff, Y., Bernard, J., Sauvant-Moynot, V., & Huet, F. (2013) · Journal of The Electrochemical Society · doi:10.1149/2.053304jes · Cited by 242
Cited by
Hu, X., Xu, L., Lin, X., & Pecht, M. (2020) · Joule · doi:10.1016/j.joule.2019.11.018 · Cited by 1,320
Harlow, J. E., Ma, X., Li, J., Logan, E., Liu, Y., Zhang, N., Ma, L., Glazier, S. L., Cormier, M. M. E., Genovese, M., et al. (2019) · Journal of The Electrochemical Society · doi:10.1149/2.0981913jes · Cited by 445
Metadata
- Authors
- Naumann, M., Schimpe, M., Keil, P., Hesse, H. C., & Jossen, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Energy Storage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-06
- Volume
- 17
- Pages
- 153-169
- ISSN
- 2352-152X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2792330355
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 9.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Analysis and modeling of calendar aging of a commercial LiFePO4/graphite cell. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.est.2018.01.019
- The paper
- Naumann, M., Schimpe, M., Keil, P., Hesse, H. C., & Jossen, A. (2018). Analysis and modeling of calendar aging of a commercial LiFePO4/graphite cell. Journal of Energy Storage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2018.01.019
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
