% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Ali:1026448,
      author       = {Ali, Haider Adel and Raijmakers, Luc and Chayambuka,
                      Kudakwashe and Danilov, Dmitri and Notten, Peter H. L. and
                      Eichel, Rüdiger-A.},
      title        = {{A} comparison between physics-based {L}i-ion battery
                      models},
      journal      = {Electrochimica acta},
      volume       = {493},
      issn         = {0013-4686},
      address      = {New York, NY [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2024-03397},
      pages        = {144360 -},
      year         = {2024},
      abstract     = {Physics-based electrochemical battery models, such as the
                      Doyle-Fuller-Newman (DFN) model, are valuable tools for
                      simulating Li-ion battery behavior and understanding
                      internal battery processes. However, the complexity and
                      computational demands of such models limit their
                      applicability for battery management systems and long-term
                      aging simulations. Reduced-order models (ROMs), such as the
                      Extended Single Particle Model (ESPM), Single Particle Model
                      (SPM) and Polynomial and Padé approximations, here all
                      referred to as simplifications, lead to faster computational
                      speeds. Choosing the appropriate simplification method for a
                      specific cell type and operating condition is a challenge.
                      This study investigates the simulation accuracy and
                      calculation speed of various simplifications for high-energy
                      (HE) and high-power (HP) batteries at different current
                      loading conditions and compares those to the full-order DFN
                      model. The results indicate that among the ROMs, the ESPM
                      consistently offers the best combination of high
                      computational speed and relatively good accuracy in most
                      conditions in comparison to the full-order DFN model. Among
                      the approximations, higher-order polynomial approximation,
                      third and fourth-order Padé approximation perform the best
                      in terms of accuracy. The higher-order polynomial
                      approximation shows an advantage in terms of computing
                      speed, while the fourth-order Padé approximation achieves
                      the highest overall accuracy among the different
                      approximations.},
      cin          = {IEK-9},
      ddc          = {540},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-9-20110218},
      pnm          = {1223 - Batteries in Application (POF4-122) / LLEC::VxG -
                      Integration von "Vehicle-to-grid" (BMBF-03SF0628) / BMBF
                      13XP0530B - ALIBES: Aluminium-Ionen Batterie für
                      Stationäre Energiespeicher (13XP0530B)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1223 / G:(DE-Juel1)BMBF-03SF0628 /
                      G:(BMBF)13XP0530B},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:001240580700001},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.electacta.2024.144360},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1026448},
}