Tests and analyses of NiCd, LiSO2, and LiCf batteries flown on the Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF) includes results from NASA, Aerospace, and commercial labs. The LiSO2 cells illustrate six-year degradation of internal components acceptable for space applications, with up to 85 percent battery capacity remaining on discharge of some returned cells. LiCf batteries completed their mission, but lost any remaining capacity due to internal degradation. Returned NiCd batteries tested an GSFC showed slight case distortion due to pressure build up, but were functioning as designed

Bene, James

Bittner, Harlin

Deligiannis, Frank

Johnson, Chris

Sullivan, David

Thaller, Larry

Tiller, Smith

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

N92-2_ 746
Summary of LDEF Battery Analyses
Presented at
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop
by
Dr. Chris Johnson
Boeing Defense & Space Group
P. O. Box 3999; M/S 8C-61
Seattle, WA 98124
(206) 773-5058
Contributing Agencies and Laboratori¢_
Aerospace Corporation
Larry Thaller & Harlin Bitmer
Jet Propulsion Laboratories
Frank Deligiannis
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Smith Tiller & David Sullivan
NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center
Subcontract - AZ Technology
SAFT America Inc.
James Bene
Boeing Subcontract
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -125- General Topic Session
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19920013503 2020-03-17T11:40:01+00:00Z
SUMMARY OF LDEF BATTERY ANALYSES
Dr. Chris Johnson
Boeing Defense & Space Group
P. O. Box 3999; M/S 8C-61
Seattle, WA 98124
ABSTRACT
Tests and analyses of NiCd, LiSO 2 and LiCF batteries flown on the Long Duration
Experiment Flight (LDEF) includes results from NASA, Aerospace and commercial labs.
The LiSO 2 cells illustrate six-year degradation of internal components acceptable for
space applications, with up to 85% battery capacity remaining on discharge of some
returned cells. LiCF batteries completed their missions, but lost any remaining capacity
due to internal degradation. Returned NiCd batteries tested at NASA-Goddard, showed
slight case distortion due to pressure build up, but were functioning as designed.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Boeing in conjunction with LDEF Systems SIG has assisted in organizing the LDEF
battery investigations on lithium sulfur dioxide (Li/SO2), lithium carbon monofluoride
(Li/CF) and nickel cadmium (NiCd) batteries. A summary of the batteries used on
specific LDEF experiments are listed in Table 1. The quantity, type of battery and state
of charge remaining for each experiment axe tabulated to indicate the range of battery
status upon return of LDEF. Sections following describe tests and analyses being
performed on each battery type, thus the division of sections by type of battery.
ANALYSES ON LITHIUM SULFUR DIOXIDE BATTERIES
Four organizations are involved in studying the lithium sulfur dioxide batteries used or:
the majority of LDEF experiments: Aerospace Corporation, Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
Naval Test Laboratories, and SAFT America ( Manufacturer of the batteries ). The
primary objective of the study is to identify degradation modes of the batteries, and to
provide information useful to future missions. This study is still underway, with only
preliminary results thus far reported. All LDEF lithium sulfur dioxide batteries
performed satisfactorily for the experiments they were designed. Interest in the ability of
these batteries to maintain charge retention has prompted testing to understand the
benefits and limitations of maintaining charge in lithium sulfur dioxide batteries for
space applications.
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -126- General Topic Session
Table 1. Summary of Battery Type, Quantity and State of Charge.
Exp # Experiment Name Battery Voltage # of SOC
Batteries
A 0038
A 0054
A 0076
A O076
A 0133
A 0133
A 0138-8
A 0138-8
A 0139-A
A 0180
A 0187-1
A 0187-1
A 0201
A 0201
A 0201
M 0003
M 00O3
M O003
M 0003
M 0003
M O003
M0004
MO004
M0004
MOO04
MOO06
MO006
P OO03
$0010
S0010
S0014
S 0014
S0014
S 0069
S 1001
S 1001
S 1002
S 1002
S 1005
S 1005
INIT
S 0069
S 1005
S 1001
Pyro Cable Cutter
Space Plasma - High Voltage
Variable Conduction Heat Pipes
Variable Conduction Heat Pipes
Space Based Radar
Phased Array Antenna
Epoxy Composite Materials
Frecopa
Crystal Growth Dewers
Recorders fo Space Exposure
Clam ,Shell E,ect-Micromeorites
Clam Shell Elect-Micromeorites
Sun Sensor-Dust Experiment
Sun Sensor-Dust Experiment
Sun Sensor-Dust Experiment
Space Env. Effects on SIC Mater.
Space Env. Effects on SIC Mater.
Space Env. Effects on S/C Mater.
Space Env. Effects on S/C Mater.
Space Env. Effects on S/C Mater.
Space Env. Effects on S/C Mater.
Space Effects on Fiber Optics
Space Effects on Fiber Optics
Space Effects on Fiber Optics
Space Effects on Fiber Optics
Space Effects - Optical Surfaces
Space Effects - Optical Surfaces
LDEF Thermal Measurements
Exposure of S/C Coatings
Exposure of S/C Coatings
Photovoltaic Cells - Sun Sensor
PhotovoltaJc Cells - Sun Sensor
Photovoltaic Cells - Sun Sensor
Carousel. Opt system
Low Temperature Heat Pipes
Low Temperature Heat Pipes
Solar cells. QCM
So_ar ceils, QCM
Flat Plate Heat Pipe Experiment
Flat Plate Heat Pipe Experiment
LDEF Initiation System
Carousel-Thermal Counductive.
Surfaces
Flat Plate Heat Pipe Experiment
Low Temperature Heat Pipes
LVS02
LVS02
U/S02
U/S02
I..i/S02
!-i/802
Li/S02
U/S02
Li/S02
IS/S02
Li/SO2
I_i/SO2
LVSO2
WSO2
LVSO2
LVSO2
LVSO2
LVSO2
LVSO2
LVSO2
U/SO2
Li/S02
LVSO2
LVSO2
LVSO2
WSO2
LVSO2
UJSO2
WS02
WS02
LVSO2
WSO2
LVSO2
LJ/SO2
WSO2
U/SO_,
LVSO2
WSO2
LVSO2
U/SO2
LVSO2
LVCF
WCF
NiCd
12
28
7.5
28,
7.5
12
7.5
28
7.5
12
7.5
12
7.5
12
28
7.5
7.5
12
12
12
12
7.5
12
12
28
7.5
28
7.5
7.5
28
7.5
12
28
7.5
7.5
12
7.5
28
7.5
12
28
28
28
18
7
4
1
1
3
2
3
3
13
2
1
2
21
2
6
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
!
1
1
2
1
1
2
39"/0
0%
84%
25%
600
75%
74%
49Ol,
640
59%
73Ol.
20°/,
85%
880
0*/0
76°/,
0%
46"/o
760
880
00/°
71%
8,50/0
850
760
77*/.
73%
760/°
77*/.
00/°
85°/,,
00/0
(7'/0
0%
85%
00/°
80°/,,
00/°
850
00/°
EP/°
Recharge
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -127- General Topic Session
Discharge data of selected experiment batteries was performed by L. Thaller of The
Aerospace Corporation (3). The discharges were performed by placing resistive loads
across the cells and monitoring the voltage to determine capacity remaining. Data from
these experiments are included in Table 1, which summarizes the state of charge
remaining in the lithium sulfur dioxide batteries for specific experiments.
Lithium sulfur dioxide batteries generally exhibit good charge retention, with loss in
capacity of less than 3-5 percent per year. LDEF lithium.sulfur dioxide batteries showed
charge retention properties commensurate with that expected based on the temperature
profile experienced bv these batteries. The state of charge remaining versus the quantity
of batteries is shown in Figure 1. Some batteries retained greater than 80 percent of their
original capacity. Ground stored batteries retained charge better than the flight batteries,
which saw minimal use. This is an expected result, since the avcratc Jtorage temperature
of the ground batteries was lower than that of the flight batteries. Ground stored batteries
remained in refrigeration at NASA Langley with an average temperature of 0 +_ 5 °C.
The average temperature of LDEF flight batteries was 15 + 10 oc, which would
produce a greater degradation of the lithium electrode. Ground stored batteries
experienced an average capacity loss of 11 percent over the 6-year LDEF flight time,
while some flight batteries on LDEF showed up to 30 percent capacity loss (2). The
favorable performance of LDEF lithium sulfur dioxide batteries adds credence to the
selection of lithium sulfur dioxide batteries of similar design for the Galileo mission.
ANALYSES ON LITHIUM CARBON MONOFLUORIDE BATTERIES
Investigation of lithium carbon monofluoride batteries was accomplished with a
subcontract from The Boeing Company to AZ Technology. Ten Li/CF batteries were
flown on LDEF as listed on Table 1. The batteries were depleted on return of LDEF.
Figure 2 shows the gradual degradation of battery voltage with time for the battery used
on the Thermal Control Surfaces Experiment (4). The required experiment life was
twelve months, with an expected life of 18 months, which the batteries exceeded.
The LiCF batteries experienced slight leakage of one cell in one of the LDEF batteries.
An "Odor" was detected in the battery case of experiment S0069, upon opening. H. L
Lewis and V. L. Hammersley at the Naval Weapons Center, Crane, Indiana, are
investigating the phenomena and will be presenting their findings in January 1992 (5).
The electrolyte used in the Eagle-Picher Industries LiCF batteries is dimethyl sulfide,
which contains small amounts of other sulfur compounds that can be quite odorous. AZ
Technology investigated the effect of the leaked electrolyte vapors on the O-ring seal of
the battery containment case (6). The seal experienced a softening and deformation due
to the attack, however indications are that any leakage was contained in the case and
created no performance problem for the battery or associated experiment.
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -128- General Topic Session
.g
/-
0
O3
_%
8O%
70%
_%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
LDEF Experirnmts v,ith USO2 Batteries - Slate of Charge
Remaining, Post Right
Figure 1. State of Charge Remaining in Li/SO 2 Batteries Returned from LDEF Flight.
Voltage
40
35
25
20 l J i I i t t l
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
Mi8sion Time (Days)
-- Max Daily Voltage _ Min Daily Voltage
Figure 2. Gradual Degradation of Voltage with Flight Duration for Li/CF Batteries
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -129- General Topic Session
TESTS AND ANALYSES ON THE NICKEL CADMIUM BATTERY
One nickel cadmium battery was flown on the Low Temperature Heat Pipe Experiment
Package (Experiment #S 1001). Analysis and test of the battery has been conducted by S.
Tiller and D. Sullivan of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (7). The battery consisted
of two 9-cell packs, which were mounted onto a 0.75 inch thick aluminum baseplate.
Prior to flight, power analysis for the 12-Ah NiCd battery indicated a need for 2 to3
ampere discharge; however, reduction in the experiment during flight resulted in a much
lower power demand. The resulting over charge of the battery became a duration test for
the NiCd battery. These batteries are not known for their ability to withstand excessive
overcharging for long times. The battery survived the entire 6-year usage and was still
functioning upon retrieval. The overcharge was reported to have developed internal
pressure, resulting in bulging of the cell cases, especially those cells on the end of the ce_
pack.
The loss of overcharge protection is obvious from the difference in voltage performance
shown for pre-flight and post-flight cells on constant charge, see Figure 3. Preflight
charge profile showed all cells were matched and reached full state of charge in 18 hours,
while maintaining voltage below 1.46V. Post-flight data experienced considerable
differences between cells with cell # 10 reaching a high voltage of 1.52 volts, which
tripped the charge for the battery off at 14 hours of charge. Discharge performance
produced similar results with pre-flight reaching 6.4 hours discharge at a C/4.8 rate,
while post-flight cells attained only 6 hours for the same conditions, see Figure 4.
CONCLUSIONS
LDEF batteries experienced mild temperature extremes during flight providing a
favorable environment for life considerations. All batteries performed to expectations
meeting and exceeding original design requirements. Minor leakage was experienced on
one cell of a LiCF battery, which resulted in minor attack of the o-ring on the battery
case, with no damage to experiment hardware. The NiCd battery endured considerable
over charge and returned with case bulging, but still functioned with decreased capacity
capability.
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -130- General Topic Session
SEQUENCE _ 86
1.5- .....
_" 1.45- .............
g
O
_ 1.4
0
1.35
If
i |1 i ii i i !
CHARGE- CONSTANT CURRENT (CLIO) , Ambietat
OATE: 06/04?90 TIME STARTED: 20,0000 TEST UNIT: POWER SY'STEM
I
10 12 "
i .....
i , ,' ' • • •
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Elapsed "rime (|_0UfS)
ii i ii i l i =m
10 18 20
Figure 3. Constant Current Charge Indicates Loss of Overcharge Protection
SEQUENCE # 78
1.3 _
1.1 ¸ .,
0
> i ¸-
O 0.9
0._ ....
0
i i i J I i i L ii ii i ii i ii
DISCHARGE. CONSTANT CURRENT (C/4 a) , AnJbi_nt
DATE: 05/25,93 TIME STAJqTED:08:10(30 TESTUNIT POWER SYSTEM
18
2
10
2 3 4 5 6 7
Elapsed "time (hours)
Figure 4. Constant Current Discharge Produces Low Capacity, Post Flight
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -131- General Topic Session
REFERENCES
1. Raman, "Experimentation and Destructive Physical Analysis for the Space-
Exposed Lithium-Sulfur Dioxide (Li/SO2) Batteries From the Long Duration Exposure
Facility (LDEF)", SAFT America Inc., Attachment 1, 1991, pp. (1)-1,2.
2. Raman, "Experimentation and Destructive Physical Analysis for the Space-
Exposed Lithium-Sulfur Dioxide (Li/SO2) Batteries From the Long Duration Exposure
Facility (LDEF)", SAFT America Inc., 1991, Attachment 1, p. 39.
3. L. Thaller, Memo Report on Discharge of LDEF LI/SO2 Cells, Aerospace
Corporation, January 1991.
4. F. Deligiannis, Presentation to Lithium Battery Safety Committee, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, July 1991.
5. H. L Lewis and V. L. Hammersley, "Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF)
Lithium Carbon Monofluoride (LiCF) Cells -- Analytical Comparison To Earth Based
Ceils", To Be Presented at The Seventh Annual Battery Conference, California State
University, Long Beach, CA. January 21-23, 1992
6. AZ Technology Report No. 90-1-100-2, "Thermal Control Surfaces Experiment
Initial Flight Data Analysis Final Report", June 1991, pp. 49-52.
7. S.E. Tiller and D. Sullivan, "Long Duration Exposure Facility Low-Temperature
Heat Pipe Experiment Package Power System Results", 1991.
1991 NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop -132- General Topic Session
Primary. Technologies Session
Organizers: Bob Bragg
NASA Johnson Space Center
Frank De "hgiannis
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
-133-



Summary of LDEF battery analyses

Summary of LDEF battery analyses

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server