Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding feature to output individual electrode expansion #2281

Closed
sravanpannala opened this issue Sep 6, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #2419
Closed

Adding feature to output individual electrode expansion #2281

sravanpannala opened this issue Sep 6, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #2419
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@sravanpannala
Copy link

Description

The model will output positive and and negative electrode thickness in addition to the overall cell thickness it currently outputs.

Motivation

Currently, the mechanical model outputs only the overall cell thickness. In many cases, especially while studying degradation, it is useful to observe and analyze individual electrode thicknesses i.e. positive and negative electrode thickness.

Possible Implementation

In the _get_mechanical_results(self, variables) function of base_mechanics.py we can add additional code so that we can get individual electrode thicknesses. I've already tried out the implementation and it is very simple.

        if self.domain+" electrode thickness change [m]" not in variables:
            electrode_thickness_change = 0
        else:
            electrode_thickness_change = variables[self.domain+" electrode thickness change [m]"]
        electrode_thickness_change += self.param.n_electrodes_parallel * v_change * L0
return {
            self.domain+" electrode thickness change [m]": electrode_thickness_change,
        }

Additional context

No response

@valentinsulzer
Copy link
Member

How's this going @sravanpannala ?

@valentinsulzer
Copy link
Member

@mbonkile is also interested in this feature

@sravanpannala
Copy link
Author

I'll try to work on it this weekend. Just for confirmation, I've to implement this on a fresh fork, right? And then run all the unit tests?

@rtimms
Copy link
Contributor

rtimms commented Feb 9, 2023

@sravanpannala any update on this? Yes, implement on your own fork and then make a PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants