Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PWM]

Trying to correlate which LG Chem pouch-cells are employed on the Energica.

The 60% increase in capacity w/ a 5% reduction in weight between the two (energy unit) variants factors mechanical design, structural materials and cell technology.

In terms of cell cathode chemistry it would be nice to know if Energica has transitioned from NCM622 to NCM712 series.

Me thinks this is the case for the 21.5KWhr based on deductive reasoning and the limited data-mining capability of Google... http://www.thelec.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=972

Why is this important?  It's not because both series are in wide-spread use and it seems the NCM712 has enhanced thermal tolerance which is a benefit.

BTW - I got the usual eye-roll from the wifey at the dinner table once again...expecting crickets here too but thought I would ask if anyone can confirm.

[MVetter]

I do know that they're Farasis cells, but I don't know the specifics of them. I do also know that the design of the 13.4 pack had the parallel packs in their own battery boxes sealed inside the massive aluminum case. with the split air channel.

The 21.5 packs do not have this. There is only one massive battery box and it is lighter than the previous battery box. So I think a lot of the weight savings came from that.

[PWM]

I do know that they're Farasis cells, but I don't know the specifics of them.

Hi MVetter - that is interesting to know, but Energica claims 95% of component sourcing is EU and Farasis is made in China - LG Chem (S. Korean) have manufacturing in Poland.  Based on monetary value breakdown the traction drive, made in USA, does align with the 5% of overall component cost so now I'm totally confused, but I trust your source is solid versus my assessment.

Recalculating...Farasis is used by Zero, could this be a mix-up on your end perhaps?

[MVetter]

Nope. New packs are Farasis cells. Energica did design the pack in-house though.

[PWM]

I believe you are correct based on the math...

13.4KWhr energy unit is comprised of (4) modules having (20S2P) configuration each  (published in Energica patent).

LG Chem (conventional NCM chemistry) cell = 3.7V (fully charged)

Farasis (enhanced anode NCM chemistry) cell = 4.1V (fully charged)

Energica pack voltage @ 3.7V = 296V which seems low.

Energica pack voltage @ 4.1V = 328V which seems right.

Looks like the cell capacity for 13.4KWhr pack ~ 20Ahr

Looks like the cell capacity for 21.5KWhr pack is ~ 32Ahr (Assumes same module configuration as 13.4KWhr unit)

Good to know - basing my info on the wrong assumptions and dated advertising by Energica (circa 2016).

Thanks MVetter for setting us straight.

[MVetter]

Might be higher than that. 4.1 is a conservative amount. Usually 4.2 is the cutoff. Zero opts for ~4.15vdc for their cells. I suspect the Energica cells might go as high as 4.2 aka 330vdc.

[wavelet]

Nope. New packs are Farasis cells. Energica did design the pack in-house though.

Farasis has an R&D center in Stuttgart, and are building a €600M battery cell plant in Bitterfeld-Wolfen, Germany (near Leipzig); both are primarily for supplying Daimler who recently announced a strategic partnership with them and invested > €1B .
I doubt the cell plant is in operation yet, but maybe the cell volume that Energica needs for the "+" bikes is low enough that either the R&D facility or a pilot production line could make them?

[PWM]

Good input guys - this is why I like to visit this site...

So, years after the warranty can a pack experience degradation simply because of a single cell gone bad?

Are there any mechanisms at play that avert this, such as forced fusing that isolates the weak sister?

I'm tempted to identify the exact series being used and buying a dozen or two spare cells to future proof the inevitable case where obsolescence will force a complete pack replacement.

Easy to shrug today but I've been burned before (CALB SE60 prismatic on current eBike) hence the basis for this inquiry...

[Crissa]

As long as packs are made of cells, yes, one bad cell can tank it.

It's the reduction in total capacity that does it in.  I don't think fusing would help.

No, you can't hoard cells for a rainy day.  Unused cells are more likely to fail.

-Crissa

[PWM]

As long as packs are made of cells, yes, one bad cell can tank it.

Unused cells are more likely to fail.

Agreed, prolonged shelf life before commissioning a cell is bound to be problematic.

Putting my trust in Farasis/CRP settles it then...as long as I do my part to manage SOC / thermals.

Thanks y'all - looks like good info exists on the Zero list which will help w/ expectation given the same cell manufacturer is used.

[MVetter]

The nice thing with Energica packs is they're serviceable. Bad cell? They can crack open the pack and replace it. This cannot be done on a Zero because the entire pack is potted in epoxy.

[princec]

<--- THAT. Major flaw in much EV design currently: small component failure -> vehicle is a very expensive brick. All components need to be servicable with reasonable labour and parts costs.

Cas

[MVetter]

Well it is a very highly specialized skill set so the labor cost might not seem reasonable to many people.

[Crissa]

And gluing things together makes the whole pack more reliable; and sometimes more thermally stable and usually lighter.

So there are definite trade-offs.

-Crissa

[MVetter]

Yes glue is lighter than not-glue. Definitely how that works.