Drawing from Anonymous' statements in the Comments section under this article, is:
Lithium Titanate Batteries, short name "LTO" LIBs (formula Li4Ti5O12) (see Table below) are an alternative to the NCA First Generation LIBs technology fitted in the Oryu (27SS) Soryu submarine.
Compared to NCA LIBs, commercial use LTO LIBs have (Scrolling one-quarter way down the Battery University website):
- Lower specific energy
- Higher Lifespan (in usage Cycles)
- Higher
Cost. But the more years between battery “exchanges” (ie. between replacement of all a
submarine’s LIBs) the lower the cost of the LIBs. and
- Higher Safety (for commercial
batteries, but submarine grade LTO safety is unknown).
See Anonymous mathematical description (below) of LTO issues:
The unit price of an LTO LIB (with an Energy Density of 80-100kW/kg) is 40-50% of NCA [1] , price of LTO module is expected 40-50% of NCA and 200-250% of LAB. Total cost (T) of batteries (480 module, operation period submarine) is as follows.
The unit price of an LTO LIB (with an Energy Density of 80-100kW/kg) is 40-50% of NCA [1] , price of LTO module is expected 40-50% of NCA and 200-250% of LAB. Total cost (T) of batteries (480 module, operation period submarine) is as follows.
LAB (unit price US$26,700; battery exchange cycle 3years = 8 times exchange) [2]
T=26700 x 480 x (1+8) = US$115 million
LTO (unit price US$26,700 x 2.5; battery exchange 10 years = 2 times or 0) [3]
T=26700 x 2.5 x 480 x (1+2) = US$96 million or US$32 million
LTO (unit price US$26,700 x 4.5; battery exchange cycle
6 years= 4 times exchange) [4]
T=26700 x 4.5 x 480 x (1+4) = US$288 million.
Though LTO is relatively low power as LIB, whose excellent stability prove significant cost reduction cheaper than LAB. LTO is suitable for countries who have high, well funded, maintenance budget. A low maintenance budget can cause serious result such as the tragedy of Argentina’s ARA San Juan and the unavailability of all 6 submarines in Germany's fleet.
[1] “Battery Strategy” Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, Japan, July/2012, page 11
[2] Comment by MoD in Administration Review: “LABs are exchanged every 3 years”
[3] Toshiba Home Page: Cycle life of LTO is 20,000 and 10 years
[4] Battery University civilian use analogy
Lithium-Sulfur (or Sulphur) Batteries LSBs are a possible future LIB for submarine technology that may take 20 more years to mature for submarine use. For development of LSBs to maturity, they need extensive testing then placing on the civilian market to establishment a reliability and safety record. LSBs for submarine would need to be produced (by GS Yuasa?) efficiently with adequate return of investment and profit.
TABLE OF LIBS BY GENERATION (provided by Anonymous)
Name
|
Composition or abbreviation
|
Energy density [kW/kg]
(theoretical)
|
Note
| |
First Generation
LIBs
|
Lithium Nickel Cobalt Aluminium Oxide
|
LiNiCoAlO2 or NCA
|
260
|
for Soryus 27SS & 28SS.
NCAs built by Japan's GS Yuasa |
Lithium Cobalt Oxide
|
LiCoO2 or LCO
|
200 (1014)
|
Shinkai 6500
| |
Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide
|
LiNiMnCoO2 or NMC
|
200
| ||
Lithium Manganese Oxide
|
LiMn2O4 or LMO
|
140 (410)
|
Proto-type by JMSDF
| |
Lithium Iron Phosphate
|
LiFePO4 or LFP
|
120 (575)
|
LFYP (China) is family of LFP
| |
Lithium titanate
|
Li4Ti5O12 or LTO
|
80
|
CEP- Japan
| |
LABs
|
LAB
|
40
| ||
LSBs
|
Lithium-sulfur
|
Li2S3
|
theoretically
about (2500) | |
Second
Generation LIBs
|
Lithium Ion Silicate
|
Li2FeSiO4
|
(1584)
|
High Safety, low cycle performance
|
Lithium Manganese Silicate
|
Li2MnSiO4
|
(1485)
|
High Safety, low cycle performance
|
Anonymous and Pete
6 comments:
Hi Pete
On LTO
As unit price of large capacity LIB is nearly same level and output of LTO (80-100kWh) is 40-50% of NCA [1], price of LTO module is expected 40-50% of NCA and 200-250% of LAB. Total cost (T) of batteries (480module, operation period submarine is as follows.
LAB (unit price 26700USD; battery exchange cycle 3years = 8 times exchange) [2]
T=26700 x 480 x (1+8) = 115 million USD
ITO (unit price 26700USD x 2.5; battery exchange 10 years = 2 times or 0) [3]
T=26700 x 2.5 x 480 x (1+2) = 96 million USD or 32 million USD
ITO (unit price 26700USD x 4.5; battery exchange cycle 6years= 4times exchange) [4]
T=26700 x 4.5 x 480 x (1+4) = 288 million USD
Though ITO is relatively low power as LIB, whose excellent stability prove significant cost reduction cheaper than LAB. ITO is suitable for countries who have enough maintenance budget. Lack of maintenance budget cause serious result such as the tragedy of submarine San Juan and the dysfunction of German submarine fleet.
[1] “Battery Strategy” Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, Japan, July/2012, page 11
[2] Comment by MoD in Administration Review: “LABs are exchanged every 3 years”
[3] Toshiba Home Page: Cycle life of ITO is 20,000 and 10 year
[4] Battery University
On LSBs
For the application of LSBs in subamrine, putting on market and eshablishment of safety in practical use for LSBs, and establishment of the said peripheral technologies and return of investment for LIBs are needed.
Regards
Hi Pete
Recent study on LSB by GS Yuasa is no clear. LSB in laboratory shows excellent performance with 95% of theoretical capacity and no capacity degradation after 2, 000 charge/discharge cycles (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/adsu.201700017). But, its practical realization and application are future issues.
Many countries are planning to develop or purchase new submarine such as AIP-LABs, LABs and LIBs. In this case, LIBs (or AIP-LIBs) submarine is better selection, because LIBs will drive out LABs in near future. If, people think they can exchange
LABs into LIBs, it may be wrong idea. Voltage of LIBs is 3.2-3.6V (2.4V for LTO) much higher than voltage of LAB (2V), the electric circuit for may be very different from LABs and change of the electrical circuit after LABs submarine building is quite difficult.
For exsample, in the Walrus concept submarine by SAAB/ Damen, obviously, low cost LIBs such as ITO are much better than LABs.
Regards
There are also several other battery technologies in the pipeline. There's an article
on the subject here:
https://www.pocket-lint.com/gadgets/news/130380-future-batteries-coming-soon-charge-in-seconds-last-months-and-power-over-the-air
Hi Anonymous
Re https://www.pocket-lint.com/gadgets/news/130380-future-batteries-coming-soon-charge-in-seconds-last-months-and-power-over-the-air
The hard part is developing a consumer grade Battery concept over a decade or three into 100s tonnes of very safe and predictable batteries for submarine use.
Regards
Pete
Hi Pete
Hopefully someone can help with the following.
Most believe LIBs are complex and far more fragile compared with robust LABs.
The great number of cells and the many connections that make up a submarine's full battery are an inherent risk. The more parts and connections in LIBs the higher risk that there could be a weakness or a point of fault.
Question are:
1. with that in mind have Japanese industry or its Navy shock tested individual cells and/or full battery packs?
2. How are the cells and packs mounted in the compartments – stiff, absorbers or shock mounted boxes?
Regards
It's important to consider the potential risks associated with the high number of cells and connections in a submarine's battery, as you pointed out. Testing individual cells and full battery packs is one way to evaluate their reliability and resilience in various conditions, including shock and vibration. As for mounting the cells and packs, there are various methods that can be used, such as stiff, absorber, or shock-mounted boxes. The choice of method will depend on factors such as the size and weight of the battery, the conditions it will be exposed to, and the desired level of protection and performance.
Post a Comment