On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

AABC-ECCAP, Atlanta, February 3-5, 2014

Yurii Maletin, Chief Scientist, Yunasko

Table of Contents

1. YUNASKO: company introduction

2. YUNASKO mantra: C-C supercapacitors for power,

batteries for energy, and hybrids in between

3. C-C supercapacitor challenges: low ESR, high voltage,

wide temperature range

4. Hybrid devices: a way to increase the energy density

5. Most recent test results: cells and modules

6. Conclusions & Acknowledgments

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

2

YUNASKO - registered in the UK since Feb. 2010 and has 2 subsidiaries:

YUNASKO-Ukraine - R&D Lab, Design Bureau and Pilot Plant;

YUNASKO-Latvia – industrial scale production in 2014;

(~70 employees total).

The core R&D team has 25 years of experience in supercapacitor technology.

Previous R&D projects included:- Idaho National Lab (1996-1997)- Superfarad/Skeleton Technologies (1996-2002)- Ener1 Group (2004-2005)- APowerCap Technologies (2006-2009)- FP7 “Energy Caps” project (ongoing)

YUNASKO

3

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

Comparison of energy storage technologies

Batteries SC Flywheels

Specific energy stored, W.h/kg 30… 150 3… 6 4… 9

Specific power (@ 95% eff.), kW/kg 0.1… 1 1… 10* 2… 4

Supercapacitors are NOT energy devices, they are POWER devices!

Key SC applications are related with covering the peaks of power, load leveling the batteries, kinetic energy recovery, etc.

4

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

* YUNASKO value only

Another approach to compare SC and batteries(taken from Dr. John R. Miller presentation)

5

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

Low inner resistance, Rin

- key advantage of SC devices in various applications

Heat generation = ʃI2RindtPower output ~ U2 / Rin

Also MASS and COST reduction!

Quick response (low RC-constant)

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

6

Most recent publication on the topic:

Y. Maletin et al. Carbon Based Electrochemical Double Layer Capacitors

of Low Internal Resistance. Energy&Environment Research, 2013, vol 3,

# 2, pp.156-165.

http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/eer/issue/current

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

7

Yunasko SC cells and combined modules

(Li-ion battery and SC stack in parallel)

Module: 14 VMax.current: 1200 AMass: 2.8 kg

Single cells:480 F1200 F1500 F

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

8

Recent Yunasko SC modules

48 V, 165 F:

DC resistance: <4 mΩMass: 13 kg

equipped with a proprietary voltage balancing system and temperature sensor

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

9

Recent Yunasko SC modules

16 V, 200 F:

DC resistance: <1 mΩMass: 2.5 kg

equipped with a proprietary voltage balancing system and temperature sensor

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

10

Yunasko competitive advantage: low heat generation

Continuous cycling the 16V module over 8 hours

basic city duty cycle

ΔT:cells in the centre

cells at the edge

Time, s

V

A, charge

A, discharge

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

11

Ukraine Ultracap is number one(cited from: BEST Battery Briefing – 29 July 2013)

“During the recent ECCAP Symposium at AABC-2013 in Strasbourg

(June 24-26) a recognised specialist in the field of supercapacitor

research – Dr. John Miller from JME Inc. revealed testing results for

the six key ultracapacitor producers, including a market leader –

Maxwell Technologies. The results showed substantial advantage

of YUNASKO technology over the closest analogues.”

(http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=84cc935cd75c22a368d1cd12e&id=31a3699821&e=193f657ac6)

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

12

Cycling between 1.75 and 3.5 V within 25… 50 °C

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

NOTE: 2.7V 3.5V results in:

• E & P increase in ~70% per a single cell, or• 14 cells in 48V module instead of 18

13

Hybrid design – a way to substantially increase the energy density

14

Yunasko approach to hybrid design:

• mixture of Li-intercalated metal oxide and nanoporous carbon as active material in BOTH electrodes;

• organic electrolytes;

• pouch-type casing of single cells (2.8V).

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

14

15

SC vs. hybrid devices: Ragone plots(test results of the Institute of Transportaion Studies, UC Davis, CA)

NOTE: test results for JM Energy hybrid were also obtained at ITS and added here for comparison

100 1000 100000

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Yunasko hybrid 6000F Yunasko AC/AC 1200F JME AC/Graphite 1100F

Sp

eci

fic e

ne

rgy,

Wh

/g

Specific power, W/kg

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

15

Hybrid cell: temperature/C-rate performance

16

-40 -20 0 20 40 600

20

40

60

80

10050 0C25 0C

Dis

ch

arg

e c

ap

ac

ity

, %

t, 0C

1 C 20 C 50 C

-30 0C

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

16

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

Nail penetration test

17

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

Nail penetration test: SC cell (voltage and temperature change)

18

Nail penetration test: hybrid cell (voltage and temperature change)

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

19

CV curves at 100 °C (organic electrolyte, but NOT acetonitrile)

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

20

Test results

Capacitance,

F

Internal resistance,

mΩ

Time constant,

s

Spec. energy (CU2/2), W.h/kg

Spec. power

(95% eff.), kW/kg

Max. spec.

power, kW/kg

SC power cells (2.7V)

480a 0.20 0.10 4.9 10.2 91

1200a,b 0.10 0.12 5.3 8.9 79

1500b 0.09 0.14 6.1 9.1 81

Hybrid cells (2.8 V)

6000a 1.0 6.0 37 4.5 NA

16 V module (6 “power” cells of 1200F in series)

200c,d 0.6 0.12 2.8 4.8 43

48 V module (18 “energy” cells of 3000F in series)

165d 4.0 0.65 4.4 1.4 12

a) Also tested in ITS, UC Davis, CA; b) Also tested in JME, Cleveland, OH;c) Also tested in Wayne State University, Detroit, MI;d) Equipped with a proprietary voltage balancing system (patent pending).

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

21

Conclusions

1. YUNASKO SC devices provide the lowest ESR resulting in the highest power density, and further improvement aimed at increasing the efficiency is an object.

2. Today YUNASKO aims at increasing the rated voltage (3.0… 3.5V) and extending the operating temperature range (-60… +100 °C) of SC devices.

3. YUNASKO hybrid devices provide substantially higher energy and power densities than competing hybrids.

We are open to cooperation.22

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to my colleagues: Dr. N.Stryzhakova, Dr. S.Zelinsky,

Dr. S.Chernukhin, Dr. D.Tretyakov, Mr. V.Shuster, et al.

for their great skill and efforts

Special thanks to Dr. Andrew Burke (ITS), Prof. John R. Miller (JME) and Prof. Dennis Corrigan (Wayne State University)

for stimulating discussions and valuable help in testing

Participation in EU FP7 Energy Caps project

is very much acknowledged

On the perspectives of supercapacitor technology

23

THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Please visit us at: www.yunasko.com