1. Case 1: Manual Assembly VS Auto Assembly
| Assembly Comparison | Manual Assembly | Automatic Assembly | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Item | Charge capacity (mAh/g) |
Discharge capacity (mAh/g) |
Efficiency (%) |
Charge capacity (mAh/g) |
Discharge capacity (mAh/g) |
Efficiency (%) |
|
| NCM-1 | Range value | 1.1 | 1.3 | 0.22% | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.26% |
| Average | 225.525 | 211.142 | 93.62% | 225.325 | 211.05 | 93.66% | |
| σ | 0.384 | 0.396 | 0.001 | 0.226 | 0.198 | 0.001 | |
| COV | 0.17% | 0.19% | 0.07% | 0.10% | 0.09% | 0.08% | |
| NCM-2 | Range value | 1.8 | 2 | 0.23% | 0.6 | 0.9 | 0.23% |
| Average | 225.467 | 211.7833 | 93.93% | 225.292 | 211.6083 | 93.93% | |
| σ | 0.44 | 0.465 | 0.001 | 0.178 | 0.231 | 0.001 | |
| COV | 0.20% | 0.22% | 0.07% | 0.08% | 0.11% | 0.07% | |
| Assembly Comparison | Manual Assembly | Automatic Assembly | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Item | Charge capacity (mAh/g) |
Discharge capacity (mAh/g) |
Efficiency (%) |
Charge capacity (mAh/g) |
Discharge capacity (mAh/g) |
Efficiency (%) |
|
| Silicon base-1 |
Range value | 20.6 | 12.6 | 0.55% | 17 | 16.8 | 0.25% |
| Average | 1908.4 | 2046.9083 | 93.24% | 1907.592 | 2044.9083 | 93.28% | |
| σ | 6.948 | 4.391 | 0.002 | 4.553 | 4.678 | 0.001 | |
| COV | 0.36% | 0.21% | 0.18% | 0.24% | 0.23% | 0.07% | |
| Silicon base-2 |
Range value | 39.7 | 22.4 | 1.46% | 19.9 | 22.2 | 0.38% |
| Average | 1897.85 | 2039.7833 | 93.02% | 1903.992 | 2041.5667 | 93.26% | |
| σ | 11.669 | 6.954 | 0.005 | 5.211 | 6.322 | 0.001 | |
| COV | 0.61% | 0.34% | 0.49% | 0.27% | 0.31% | 0.11% | |
For NCM materials:
- The range of charge/discharge specific capacity for NCM with automatic assembly is 0.6~0.9 mAh/g (σ ≈ 0.25), while with manual assembly it is 1~2 mAh/g (σ ≈ 0.4).
For Silicon-based anode materials:
- The range of charge/discharge specific capacity for Si-based materials with automatic assembly is 15~20 mAh/g (σ ≈ 4~6), while with manual assembly it is 20~40 mAh/g (σ ≈ 5~10).
Conclusion: While the average specific capacity values obtained from automated and manual assembly methods were comparable for both material types, automated assembly demonstrated superior stability compared to manual assembly.
2. Case 2: Automatic Coin Cell Assembly of LFP Cathodes
| Category | Item | Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 1.5 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 1 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.5 | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | |
| Average | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 161 | 160.7 | 160.7 | 161.3 | 161.1 | 161.1 | 161.1 |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 156.9 | 156.7 | 156.6 | 157 | 156.9 | 156.9 | 156.9 | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 97.4 | 97.5 | 97.5 | 97.4 | 97.4 | 97.4 | 97.4 | |
| σ | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.37 | 0.32 | 0.33 | 0.38 | 0.24 | 0.2 | 0.12 |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.31 | 0.36 | 0.29 | 0.3 | 0.25 | 0.16 | 0.12 | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 0.18 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.3 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.12 | |
| COV | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.23% | 0.20% | 0.21% | 0.24% | 0.15% | 0.12% | 0.10% |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.20% | 0.23% | 0.18% | 0.19% | 0.16% | 0.10% | 0.10% | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 0.18% | 0.12% | 0.09% | 0.31% | 0.11% | 0.12% | 0.12% |
Conclusion:
- The standard deviation (σ) for the charge/discharge specific capacity of each group is less than 0.4.
- The range for the charge/discharge specific capacity of each group is less than 1.5 mAh/g.
- The coefficient of variation (COV) for the charge/discharge specific capacity of each group is less than 0.3%.
3. Case 3: Automatic Coin Cell Assembly of Graphite Anodes
| Category | Item | Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.5 |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.1 | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.6 | |
| Average | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 347.9 | 347.8 | 347.7 | 347.3 | 345.4 | 346.2 | 346.1 |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 367.8 | 368.4 | 368.2 | 368.2 | 367.7 | 368.2 | 368.8 | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 94.6 | 94.4 | 94.4 | 94.3 | 93.9 | 94 | 93.8 | |
| σ | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.28 | 0.38 | 0.31 | 0.34 | 0.45 | 0.35 | 0.44 |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.57 | 0.62 | 0.6 | 0.53 | 0.51 | 0.65 | 0.69 | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.17 | 0.15 | |
| COV | Charge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.08% | 0.11% | 0.09% | 0.10% | 0.13% | 0.10% | 0.13% |
| Discharge capacity (mAh/g) | 0.16% | 0.17% | 0.16% | 0.14% | 0.14% | 0.18% | 0.19% | |
| Coulombic Effi (%) | 0.14% | 0.16% | 0.15% | 0.13% | 0.14% | 0.18% | 0.16% |
Conclusion:
- The standard deviation (σ) for the discharge specific capacity in each group is less than 0.8, and for the chargespecific capacity, it is less than 0.5.
- The range for the discharge specific capacity in each group is less than 2.1 mAh/g, and for the charge specificcapacity, it is less than 1.5mAh/g.
- The coefficient of variation (COV) for both charge and discharge specific capacity in each group is less than 0.2%.
4. Case 4: Curling Issue of Single-Sided Electrodes after Calendering and Punching
Conclusion:
- Our specially designed suction cup can ensure that the curled electrodes are sucked evenly and flatly.
- Our visual positioning system can avoid the placement position deviation caused by the curling of the electrodes.
- The positive electrode shell is pressed down horizontally to flatten the curled electrode that contacts the electrolyte.
