Carolyn R. Mercer, Amy L. Jankovsky, Concha M. Reid, Thomas B. Miller,

and Mark A. Hoberecht

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Energy Storage Project

Final Report

NASA/TM—2011-216963

January 2011
NASA STI Program . . . in Profi le

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) 

program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role.

The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices 

of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, 

organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates 

NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program provides access 

to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and 

its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports 

Server, thus providing one of the largest collections 

of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. 

Results are published in both non-NASA channels 

and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which 

includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major signifi cant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

programs and include extensive data or theoretical 

analysis. Includes compilations of signifi cant 

scientifi c and technical data and information 

deemed to be of continuing reference value. 

NASA counterpart of peer-reviewed formal 

professional papers but has less stringent 

limitations on manuscript length and extent of 

graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientifi c 

and technical fi ndings that are preliminary or 

of specialized interest, e.g., quick release 

reports, working papers, and bibliographies that 

contain minimal annotation. Does not contain 

extensive analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientifi c and 

technical fi ndings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientifi c and technical 

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other 

meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, 

technical, or historical information from 

NASA programs, projects, and missions, often 

concerned with subjects having substantial 

public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientifi c and 

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

Specialized services also include creating custom 

thesauri, building customized databases, organizing 

and publishing research results.

For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

• E-mail your question via the Internet to help@

sti.nasa.gov

• Fax your question to the NASA STI Help Desk 

at 443–757–5803

• Telephone the NASA STI Help Desk at

 443–757–5802

• Write to:

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI)

 7115 Standard Drive

 Hanover, MD 21076–1320
Carolyn R. Mercer, Amy L. Jankovsky, Concha M. Reid, Thomas B. Miller,

and Mark A. Hoberecht

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Energy Storage Project

Final Report

NASA/TM—2011-216963

January 2011

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

Cleveland, Ohio 44135
Acknowledgments

NASA’s Exploration Technology Development Program supported this work, conducted by the Energy Storage Project. Many 

people contributed to this work. Special thanks to NASA ESMD: Chris Moore and John Warren, NASA ETDP: Frank Peri and 

Diane Hope, NASA Constellation: David Westheimer, Rob Button, Pat George, Lisa Kohout, Josh Freeh, James Fincannon, Barb 

McKissock, and Patricia Loyselle, NASA Technical Staff: Ratnakumar Bugga, Judy Jeevarajan, Koroosh Araghi, S.R. Narayan, 

Bill Bennett, Marshall Smart, Ken Burke, and Ian Jakupca, NASA Management Staff: John Scott, Michelle Manzo, and Subbarao 

Surampudi, NASA Contractors: Infi nity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, Inc./Bill Smith; Saft, America/Bob Staniewicz; UT Austin/

Arumugam Manthiram; PSI/Christopher Lang; NEI Corp/Ganesh Skandan; Lockheed Martin/Justin Golightly; GeorgiaTech/

Gleb Yushin; Giner/Robert McDonald; and Yardney Technical Products/Boris Ravdel.

Available from

NASA Center for Aerospace Information

7115 Standard Drive

Hanover, MD 21076–1320

National Technical Information Service

5301 Shawnee Road

Alexandria, VA 22312

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov

Level of Review: This material has been technically reviewed by technical management. 
Energy Storage Project 

Final Report 

Carolyn R. Mercer, Amy L. Jankovsky, Concha M. Reid, 

Thomas B. Miller, and Mark A. Hoberecht 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Glenn Research Center 

Cleveland, Ohio 44135 

Abstract 

NASA’s Exploration Technology Development Program funded the Energy Storage Project 

to develop battery and fuel cell technology to meet the expected energy storage needs of the 

Constellation Program for human exploration. Technology needs were determined by 

architecture studies and risk assessments conducted by the Constellation Program, focused on 

a mission for a long-duration lunar outpost. Critical energy storage needs were identified as 

batteries for EVA suits, surface mobility systems, and a lander ascent stage; fuel cells for the 

lander and mobility systems; and a regenerative fuel cell for surface power. To address these 

needs, the Energy Storage Project developed advanced lithium-ion battery technology, targeting 

cell-level safety and very high specific energy and energy density. Key accomplishments include 

the development of silicon composite anodes, lithiated-mixed-metal-oxide cathodes, lowflammability electrolytes, and cell-incorporated safety devices that promise to substantially 

improve battery performance while providing a high level of safety. The project also developed 

“non-flow-through” proton-exchange-membrane fuel cell stacks. The primary advantage of this 

technology set is the reduction of ancillary parts in the balance-of-plant – fewer pumps, 

separators and related components should result in fewer failure modes and hence a higher 

probability of achieving very reliable operation, and reduced parasitic power losses enable 

smaller reactant tanks and therefore systems with lower mass and volume. Key 

accomplishments include the fabrication and testing of several robust, small-scale non-flowthrough fuel cell stacks that have demonstrated proof-of-concept. This report summarizes the 

project’s goals, objectives, technical accomplishments, and risk assessments. A bibliography 

spanning the life of the project is also included. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 1
Overview

• Project Goals and Objectives

• Summary of Accomplishments

• Fuel Cells Fuel Cells

• Prior work in flow-through technology

• Current work in non-flow-through 

technology

• Predicted System Performance

• Batteries

• Components

• Cells

• Predicted System Performance

• Summary

• Bibliography

Energy Storage Technologies for 

Altair, EVA, and Lunar Surface Systems

L i i 

10 kW Array (net)

2 kW Array (net)

Conceptual Lunar Outpost Surface Systems

Communication/ Navigation

Habitation

Element

PSU

(Facilitates SPR 

docking & charging)

Habitation

Element

Logistics

Pantry

Logistics

Pantry

Power Support Unit (PSU)

( Supports / scavenges from 

crewed landers )

Small Pressurized

Rover (SPR)

ATHLETE

Long-distance

Mobility System (2)

Common Airlock

With Lander

ISRU Oxygen

Production Plant

Unpressurized Rover

NASA/TM—2011-216963 2
Energy Storage Project 

Objective and Overall Approach

The Energy Storage Project’s objective is to reduce risks associated with the use of Lithium chemistry 

batteries, fuel cells, and regenerative fuel cells for Altair, Lunar Surface Systems, and EVA. 

Our deliverables are:

– Primary fuel cell for Altair Descent Stage (TRL 6 by PDR)

– R ti f l ll f LSS (TRL 6 ft CDR) Regenerative fuel cell for LSS (TRL 6 after CDR)

– Rechargeable battery cells for Altair Ascent Stage, EVA Suit 2, and LSS 

EVA and Altair: TRL 6 cells by PDR; LSS: TRL 6 cells by PDR; 

All: cells early enough for batteries by CDR

We are addressing the top technology development needs for advanced energy storage:

– Human-rating and increased reliability

– Mass/volume reductions

– High performance components and systems

And we are performing systems analyses to ensure the right approaches are being pursued: And we are performing systems analyses to ensure the right approaches are being pursued:

– Cost/benefit analyses based on Constellation mission architectures.

Mechanisms to determine Constellation Requirements:

• Cx Technology Prioritization Process

• Risk Identification Workshop (Aug 2007 and Aug 2008)

• Lunar Architecture Team reports

• Exploration Architecture Requirements Document

• Points-of-contact on Lander, Surface Systems, EVA, and Ares I/V projects

Energy Storage Project

Documented Constellation Priorities

Documentation Project Criticality Technology Need

LAT-2 #MOB-5 Mobility Enabling

High Specific-Energy-Density Power Systems – Need lightweight, long-life 

rechargeable batteries and need reliable micro-fuel cells to reduce mass of the 

power system by 30% - 50% to extend life of the power system components, 

and to reduce cost and frequency of maintenance.

LAT 2 #POW 1 Surface Systems Enabling

High Specific-Energy-Density PEM Fuel Cell Systems – Need light weight, longlife (10,000 hr) regenerative fuel cells, 2000 psi electrolyzer, and water 

LAT-2 #POW-1 Surface Systems Enabling separators designed for 1/6 g envir separators designed for 1/6 g environment to improve life/reliability onment to improve life/reliability to ,

increase mass to the lunar surface, and to reduce cost.

LAT-2 #EVA-3 EVA Enabling

High Specific-Energy-Density EVA Suit PLSS Power – Need lightweight, high 

energy density rechargeable batteries and micro-fuel cells to increase useable 

mass to lunar surface, to increase EVA range and mission flexibility. 

LSS TPP – Draft

IRMA ID 2380 Surface Systems

Critical

Regenerative fuel cells - Meet energy storage requirements for up to 15 days

(360 hours) or more (e.g., for a 20 kWe night time power requirement, this 

means an energy storage requirement of 7,200 kW-hrs of storage capacity

(2 orders of magnitude greater than ISS)) Also highly desirable to have 5 year 

lifetime.

IRMA Risk ID 2527 EVA 5x5 Required specific energy not achievable with current batteries

Cx TPP 606

Surface Systems, 

Orion and ILSM SiG

Critical

Cx TPP 606 Orion and ILSM SiG LS #2 Regenerative fuel cell Regenerative fuel cell for Lunar Surface Systems for Lunar Surface Systems

Cx TPP 466 Lander

Critical

LT #28 Low mass, highly reliable fuel cell for Lunar Lander power generation.

Cx TPP 465 

IRMA Risk ID 4796 Lander

Critical

LT #27

Low mass rechargeable battery to power the Lunar Lander ascent module during 

ascent from the lunar surface. 

Cx TPP 544 EVA

Critical

LT #12 EVA Suit power

Cx TPP 661 Surface Systems

Highly 

Desirable

LS #11 High specific energy power for Lunar Rovers

Ares V Risk #2366

Cx TPP 525 Ares I/V

5x5

Critical LT #16

Solid Rocket Booster Thrust Vector Control Power Source require high power, 

primary batteries Updated 4/21/08

NASA/TM—2011-216963 3
Energy Storage Technology Development 

Mission Requirements Assessment

Lunar Architecture Studies identified regenerative fuel cells and rechargeable batteries as enabling 

technology, where enabling technologies are defined as having:

“overwhelming agreement that the program cannot proceed without them.” 

Surface Systems 

Surface Power: Maintenance-free operation of regenerative fuel cells for >10,000 hr using

~2000 psi electrolyzers psi electrolyzers. Power level TBD (2 kW modules for current architecture) level TBD (2 kW modules for current architecture)

Reliable, long-duration maintenance-free operation; human-safe operation; 

architecture compatibility; high specific-energy, high system efficiency.

Mobility Systems: Reliable, safe, secondary batteries and regenerative fuel cells in small mass/volume. 

200 W-hr/kg desired; 150 W-hr/kg may be sufficient.

Human-safe operation; reliable, maintenance-free operation; architecture 

compatibility; high specific-energy. 

EVA 

Portable Life Support System (PLSS); and Power, Communications, Avionics, and 

Informatics (PCAI) Subsystem: 

Human-safe operation; 8-hr duration; high specific energy; high energydensity.

Lander

Ascent Stage: Rechargeable battery capability for ascent operations and to support emergency 

lander/surface operations. Nominally 14 kWhr in 67 kg, 45 liter package.

Human-safe, reliable operation; high energy-density.

Descent Stage: Functional primary fuel cell with 5.5 kW peak power.

Human-safe reliable operation; high energy-density; architecture compatibility 

(operate on residual propellants).

Fuel Cell Systems

• Goals

• Approach

• Technology Development

• Predicted System Level Performance

NASA/TM—2011-216963 4
Key Performance Parameters for Fuel Cell Technology Development

Customer Need Performance Parameter SOA

(alkaline)

Current

Value*

(NFT PEM)

Threshold

Value**

(@ 3 kW)

Goal**

(@ 3 kW)

Altair:

3 kW for 220 hr 

continuous, 5.5 kW peak.

System power density 

Fuel Cell

RFC (without tanks)

49 W/kg

n/a

44 W/kg

n/a

88 W/kg

25 W/kg

136 W/kg

36 W/kg

Fuel Cell Stack power density n/a 51 W/kg 107 W/kg 231 W/kg

Fuel Cell Balance-of-plant mass n/a 2 kg 21 kg 9 kg

*Based on non-flow-through test 

hardware with 4-cells and heavy 

end plates, scaled to 3 kW

**Threshold and Goal values based 

on full-scale (3 kW, 300 cm2) fuel 

cell and RFC technolog

Lunar Surface Systems: 

TBD kW for 15 days 

continuous operation

Rover: TBD

MEA efficiency @ 200 mA/cm2

For Fuel Cell

Individual cell voltage

For Electrolysis

Individual cell voltage

For RFC (Round Trip)

73%

0.90 V

n/a

n/a

n/a

72%

0.89 V

83%

1.48

60%

73%

0.90 V

84%

1.46

62%

75%

0.92 V

85%

1.44

64%

System efficiency @ 200 mA/cm2

Fuel Cell 71% 64% 71% 74%

4/5/10

cell and RFC technology.

***Includes high pressure penalty 

on electrolysis efficiency 2000 psi

Parasitic penalty

Regenerative Fuel Cell***

Parasitic penalty

High Pressure penalty

2%

n/a

n/a

n/a

8%

n/a

n/a

n/a

2%

43%

10%

20%

1%

54%

5%

10%

Maintenance-free lifetime

Altair: 220 hr (primary)

Surface: 10,000 hr (RFC)

Maintenance-free operating life

Fuel Cell MEA

Electrolysis MEA

Fuel Cell System (for Altair) 

Regenerative Fuel Cell System

2500 hr 

n/a

2500 hr

n/a

13,500 hr

n/a

n/a

n/a

5,000 hr

5,000 hr

220 hr

5,000 hr

10,000 hr

10,000 hr

220 hr

10,000 hr

Summary of Fuel Cell and Regenerative Fuel Cell Technology Development since 2006

Flow-Through Fuel Cell Stack Development (Work stopped)

13,500 hr of MEA testing complete, passing 10,000 hr life goal through use of Pt-black catalysts

System characterized, strengths and weaknesses documented

Component Development

Passive components for Flow-Through Balance-of-Plant (Work stopped)

Water/gas separators, injectors/ejectors, regulators

Devices characterized, strengths and weaknesses documented

Passive thermal management (Work stopped)

Pyrolitic graphite cooling plates and flat plate heat pipes Pyrolitic graphite cooling plates and flat plate heat pipes

Tested in Flow-Through and Non-Flow-Through fuel cell stacks, respectively

Temperature distribution across any single plate and from plate-to-plate stays within 2-3 C

Devices characterized, strengths and weaknesses documented

MEAs for fuel cells (Work continues)

JPL MEAs supplied to Teledyne, Infinity, and Proton

0.89 V at 200 mA/cm2 exceeds the performance of vendor cells substantially

Work continues

MEAs for high pressure electrolyzers (Work continues)

JPL MEAs supplied to Hamilton Sundstrand

Work continues

High Pressure Electrolysis (Work continues only under SBIR)

Hamilton-Sundstrand system modified for high pressure operation; tested at JPL

Liquid feed system draws significant parasitic power for pumps and water/gas separators

Novel concepts under study via SBIR (vapor feed, passive liquid feed)

Non-Flow-Through Fuel Cell Stack Development (Work continues)

Water removal mechanism and advanced manufacturing process brought to TRL 4

Electrochemical hydrogen pump implemented to provide low-power purge and inert concentration

Unitized Regenerative Fuel Cell System (Work stopped)

System characterized, strengths and weaknesses documented

NASA/TM—2011-216963 5
3.2.1 Flow-Through Primary PEMFC Development

Key Accomplishment: Accomplishment:

• Initiated testing of Teledyne multi-kW flow-through 

PEMFC breadboard system

• Achieved several hundred hours of testing through 

multiple simulated Shuttle load profiles

Significance:

• Passive reactant recirculation and water separator 

components replace active components; reduced 

mass and volume, lower parasitic power, increased 

reliability, longer life

• Initial performance testing has identified 

limitations and control issues with reactant 

recirculation system using ejectors and solenoid 

valves

• Initial testing has shown performance of 

membrane water separators to be comparable

NASA MEA Life Testing - September 2004 to July 2006

Cell Voltage and Current Density vs. Time

NASA MEA 4-Cell Test Stack

Performance Over Time

1.0

1.1

700

800

Cell#1 Cell Voltage

Cell#2 Cell Voltage

Cell#3 Cell Voltage

Cell#4 Cell Voltage

Teledyne multi-kW flow-through PEMFC Breadboard

membrane water separators to be comparable

to active water separators

• Successfully passed 10,000 hr life goal through use 

of Pt-black catalysts on MEA (13,500 hr)

• Establishes the basis for all future MEA 

advancements

Run Time (Hour)

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

Cell Voltage (V) 0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Current Density (mA/cm2

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Cell#4 Cell Voltage

Current Density

Water/Gas Separators

12

14 Flow Resistance Design Target :

13.8 inches of water at 20 slpm

Active

5.67 kg each

100 W parasitic loss each

================

11 kg

200 W

Passive

0.45 kg each

0 W parasitic loss each

==============

1 kg

0 W

Passive Water/Gas Separators: no 

performance degradation

FC Recent Accomplishments: GRC Passive Water/Gas Separators 

Reduce Mass and Parasitic Power Without Compromising Performance

2

4

6

8

10

Pressu re Dro p , in ch H2O

Flow Resistance Performance :

2.3 inches of water at 50 slpm

200 W 0 W

O2 / H2O

0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

H2 / H2O Air Mass Flow, slpm

O2 / H2O H2/H2O

Additional “cells” to 

fuel cell stack

Active Separators

O2 or H2 Wicking 

Material

Separator 

Housing

Gas Flow Channel

Passive Separators

Side view (above), top view (right)

NASA/TM—2011-216963 6
Flow-Through Primary PEMFC Development

Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Completed testing of GRC membrane water separator

• Accepted delivery of Lockheed meniscus water separator

Significance:

• Passive water separators replace active mechanical water separators; reduced mass and 

volume, lower parasitic power, increased reliability, longer life

• Testing p has shown performance of GRC membrane water sep p arator to be comparable 

to active water separators

• Initial assessment of Lockheed meniscus water separator is not promising because of 

gravity dependency

• Initial assessment of Texas A&M gas-driven vortex water separator is not promising 

because of insufficient momentum for consistent operation

deflection 

plate

Integrated Ejector/Regulator and 

Integrated Ejector/Regulator/TwoStage Water Separator System 

Lockheed Meniscus Water Separator

Top Level Assembly

vane device

liquid level sensor TAMU Gas-driven water 

separator demonstration 

Flow-Through Primary PEMFC Development

Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Completed initial assessment of combined reactant recirculation and water separator 

concepts at NASA JSC/Texas A&M

Significance:

• Passive reactant recirculation and water separator components replace active components; 

reduced mass and volume, lower parasitic power, increased reliability, longer life

• Initial testing has shown performance of Tescom Initial testing has shown performance of Tescom integrated ejector/ pressure regulator integrated ejector/ pressure regulator

to be comparable to active pumps

• Initial testing has shown performance of two-stage membrane contactor and de-bubbler 

(both tubular) to be comparable to active water separators

• Initial testing has shown gas-driven vortex separator to lack sufficient momentum for 

consistent operation

• Initial testing has shown liquid-driven vortex separator connected to pumped coolant 

loop to be comparable to active water separators 

RV-8501

PT-8501

1000 psig

H-8601

0.0

PT-8503

100 psig A

Suction

ER-8402

Flexible 

Tubing

Flexible 

Tubing MOV-8501

M

FH-8401

Fle

Tu

10-32 female threaded O-ring port for Beswick 

fittings, Dome Pressure Set Point -- 0 to 100 psig

This must be fluid tight such as might be

Phase 4, Integrated Ejector, Regulator, and 

Two-Stage Water Separator System 

3/8

3/8

Set 50 psig

GN2 to Sys. 8F028, TK-8401

Phase 1. Ref 356-8F028-M1

50psig

0.0

0.0 DP-8502

10 psid PT-8502

100 psig

H2O fromSys. 8F028,

WFC-8401, Phase 1. 

Ref 356-8F028-M1, 50psig

TK-8601

Flexible 

Tubing

Fl

T

Flexible 

Tubing

GFM-8501

300 SLPM

P-8602 0-30 mLPM 

Suction

M

MOV-8502

P-8601 0-30 mLPM 

DR-8601

0.0

H

H 8601

0.0

Motive gas

PT-8601

100 psig

BPR-8601

0.0

PT-8602

100 psig

GN2 from Sys. 8F028, ER-8401

Phase 1. Ref 356-8F028-M1

100psig

To Open Tank, 

Drain

De-bubbler 

Assm

Phase 2 Integrated Ejector and Regulator Package

Variable Internal Flow Area Inserts

positioned here -- 0 to 100 psig

10-32 female threaded O-ring port for

Beswick precision orifice fitting, Ejector Jet

0 to 1000 psig

10-32 female threaded O-ring port for 

Beswick fitting, Ejector Supply Pressure --

0 to 1000 psig

10-32 female threaded O-ring port for 

Beswick fitting, Supply Pressure -- supply 

pressures from 0 to 1000 psig , this is an 

instrumentation fitting, it is not absolutely necessary

1/4” male A/N fitting (37degree flared), Supply Inlet Port, 

supply pressures from 0 to 1000 psig

TBD” female port,

Total Flow Outlet Port

0 to 100 psig

10-32 female threaded O-ring port for 

Beswick fitting, System Pressure -- 0 to 100 psig

Suggested port routing for 10-32 

instrumentation ports and internal 

loading passages. 

TBD” female port,

Suction Flow Inlet Port

TBD” female port,

Suction Flow Inlet Port

This must be fluid-tight, such as might be

provided by an O-ring sliding seal. 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 7
T P

T P Heater

Sensors

Fuel 

Cell 

Stack

Conventional 

Fuel Cell with 

Pumped Loop 

Thermal 

Management

Bypass 

Valve

Recent Accomplishments: Fuel Cells

Significance: Passive cooling 

plates replace active pumpedliquid cooling loop; reduced 

mass and volume, lower 

parasitic power, increased 

Key accomplishment: Completed fab of passive cooling 

plates for Teledyne and Infinity short stacks

Heater

Fuel Cell

Fuel 

Cell 

Stack

Thermostat Valve Fuel Cell with 

Passive 

Thermal 

Management

Accumulator

Pump Fuel Cell 

System Hx

Management

Th l t

p p,

reliability, longer life

Testing has shown pyrolytic 

graphite cooling plates to 

have 4x the conductivity of 

copper

Testing has shown flat-plate 

heat pipes to have 30-40x 

the conductivity of copper Fuel Cell

System Hx

Flat-Plate Heat Pipes for 

4-Cell TRL-4 Non-Flow-Through Stack

Thermal management

vacuum test rig

Temperature Distribution Across Pyrolytic 

Graphite Cooling Plates In 6-Cell Sub-kW 

Flow-Through Stack

Testing shows the temperature distribution across any single plate and from plateto-plate stays within 2-3 C which is very acceptable.

Temperature control uses a thermostatic valve to modulate the cooling flow 

through the HX.

Recent Accomplishments: 

Passive Cooling Reduces System Mass and Complexity 

Without Degrading Performance (1/2)

Thermal Conductivity Tests in VF-15

90 P l ti

Four Graphite Cooling Plates slid into the 

HX Interface Plate & Cooling Channel. 

Pad heaters simulate FC heat.

Graphite Cooling Plate

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Thermal Flux, W/cm2

Stainless Steel

Copper

Heat Pipes 

Copper &Titanium

Pyrolytic 

Graphite

Pyrolytic Graphite 

Copper Laminate 

Cooling Plates

Heat Pipes and Pyrolytic Graphite have high 

enough thermal conductivity to be acceptable 

lightweight cooling plates for fuel cells while 

copper does not. 

Exploded View Showing Graphite 

Cooling Plates & HX Interface Plate

HX Interface Plate The graphite cooling plates, HX Interface Plate, and HX Cooling Channel have been 

fabricated and delivered to Teledyne Energy Systems for integration into a 6-cell FlowThru Stack.

The 6-Cell fuel cell stack has been fully assembled.

The integrated FC stack is to be tested at Teledyne in August 2008.

Simulated fuel cell stack testing with identical graphite cooling plates underway at GRC.

0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

Thermal Gradient, o

C/cm

NASA/TM—2011-216963 8
Ti Heat Pipe

Recent Accomplishments: 

Passive Cooling (2/2)

Exploded View Showing Ti Heat Pipe FC Stack Showing Ti Heat Pipe Edges FC Stack with HX Interface Plate 

The Ti heat pipes have been fabricated and tested at GRC. Their 

thermal conductivity ranged from 3500 to 6300 w-m/K. (copper is

400 w-m/K)

FC Stack Integrated with System HX

The Ti heat pipes were delivered to Infinity Fuel Cells for integration 

into the non-flow-through stack 

The HX Interface plate hardware has been fabricated and will be 

delivered to Infinity for final stack assembly

The integrated FC stack is to be delivered to GRC by Fall 2008 for 

testing.

Preparations are being made for this testing to occur in the GRC

Bldg 309 Fuel Cell Laboratory

Milestone Accomplishment: 

MEA Testing Shows Substantial Improvement Over SOA

1.000

1.200

Jet Propulsion

Laboratory

Nafion 115

4.0 mg/cm2 Ptunsupported cathode

~65% RH @ inlet

70 oC

Single Cell Polarization Curves (as measured)

0.400

0.600

0.800

Ecell (V)

70 C

300 kPaabs H2/O2

Narayan et al, STAIF 2007

0.58 V

0.88 V

0.000

0.200

0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 1000.0 1200.0 1400.0 1600.0 1800.0

Current Density (mA/cm2)

Nafion 111

0.5 mg/cm2 PtC-supported cathode

60% RH @ inlet

80 oC

100 kPaabs H2/O2

Neyerlin et al, ECS Journal,154:B279-87, 2007

NASA/TM—2011-216963 9
80.0

90.0

100.0

Electrolysis MEA 

86%

Membrane Electrode Assembly Accomplishments: 

MEA Performance Exceeds Minimum Success Criteria

JPL MEAs supplied to 

Teledyne, Infinity, and Proton Energy

 NASA fuel cell and electrolysis MEA 

performance exceeds best performance of 

industry vendors

20 0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

E ffic ie n c y %

Fuel Cell MEA

72%

(86%)(72%) = 62% 

round-trip RFC stack efficiency

@ 200 mA/cm2

Efficiency (%)

1

1.2

 70o

C, 30 psig H2/O2

0.0

10.0

20.0

0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00

current density, mA/cm2

200 mA/cm2

Current density, mA/cm2

(scale: 0 – 2000 mA/cm2)

Comparison of JPL’s best iridium-doped ruthenium with the latest vendor supplied 

MEA shows substantially better (30 mV) performance by the NASA material.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

current density, mA/cm2

cell voltage, V

Gen 1 JPL N115 

Gen 2 -JPL N1035 

Vendor 1

N115

JPL MEAs performing at 0.89 V at 200 mA/cm2 exceed 

the performance of Vendor cells substantially.

Key Accomplishment: Accomplishment:

• JPL-developed MEA 86% efficient at 1.48 V

Objective:Objective:

Develop balanced high-pressure (≥ 2,000 psi) electrolysis technology for Exploration missions. 

Incorporate advanced membrane-electrode-assemblies (MEAs) with better electrical performance into highpressure electrolyzers.

MEA and Electrolysis MEA and Electrolysis Technology: Recent Progress Technology: Recent Progress

Partners: Hamilton Sundstrand, NASA

High-pressure electrolyzer in test stand

• Hamilton Sundstrand modified existing International Space 

Station electrolyzer (liquid-feed) for high-pressure operation. 

• Testing at JPL showed good voltage performance to

2000 psi H2 and 1000 psi O2 with Nafion MEA.

Significance:

• Advanced electrolysis MEAs will deliver more H2 and O2

gases with less electrical power input, reducing the required 

size of a solar array for a regenerative fuel cell system.

• Balanced high-pressure operation permits operation within 

an archit t h i ll t k d i l h hitecture having smaller tanks, reducing launch mass 

and volume requirements.

Future Work:

•Vapor-feed and passive liquid-feed electrolyzers are being 

investigated to reduce the significant parasitic power draw of 

the pumps and water/gas separators required for liquid feed 

systems. 83 cm2 MEA with platinum-black catalyst 

on hydrogen side and iridium oxide 

catalyst on oxygen side

NASA/TM—2011-216963 10
Background:

Flow-Through PEMFC technology is characterized by 

recirculating reactants and external product water separation

• Recirculation requires pumps or injectors/ejectors

• Water separation requires motorized centrifugal

Recent Accomplishments: 

Flow-Through vs. Non-Flow-Through PEMFC Down-Select

Non-Flow-Through

PEMFC Schematic

Water separation requires motorized centrifugal

separators or passive membrane separators

Non-flow-through PEMFC technology is characterized by 

dead-ended reactants and internal product water removal

• Tank pressure drives reactant feed; no recirculation

• Water separation occurs through internal cell wicking

Selection:Selection:

Non-flow-through PEM fuel cell technology selected for further 

development

Justification:

Flow-through PEMFC technology is at a higher TRL, but 

non-flow-through technology offers advantages in efficiency, 

weight, volume, parasitic power, reliability, life, and cost. FT NFT

Stack 16 kg 13 kg

BOP 21 kg 9 kg

Total 37 kg 22 kg

Representative mass 

allocation for 3 kW fuel cell

derivative of Gemini fuel cell technology

Recent Accomplishments: 

Non-Flow-Through System Testing Begun

Non-flow-through PEMFC technology is 

characterized by dead-ended reactants and 

internal product water removal

Tank pressure drives reactant feed; 

no recirculation required

Pumps or 

injectors/ejectors for 

recirculation

no recirculation required

Water separation occurs through 

internal cell wicking

Components eliminated in NFT 

system include:



50 cm2 Lab Stack #1 

Integrated with Balance-of-Plant

Motorized centrifugal 

separators or passive 

membrane separators for 

water separation

Packaging Concept for 

Non-Flow-Through System



NASA/TM—2011-216963 11
Non-Flow-Through Primary PEMFC Development

Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Completed testing of non-flow-through PEMFC single cell at Phase II SBIR contractor infinity 

technologies

• Completed 3D modeling of balance-of-plant components at NASA GRC

Significance:

NASA APWR Cell Testing

1.000

1.200

Conditions:

Date: 4-3-07

Cell dead ended. Passive water removal mode, no venting

MEA: A-1

Temp: 70 deg C

O2 Press =31.01 @ 0 ma/cm2 to 29.88 psi @ 1000 ma/cm2

H2 press = 31.31@ 0 ma/cm2 to 29.54psi @ 1000 ma/cm2

H20 Press = 25.62 constant from 0 to 1000 ma/cm2

• Successful steady-state operation in dead-ended mode demonstrated; achieved current 

densities > 1,000 mA/cm2

• Establishes the basis for future non-flow-through technology advancements

• All ancillary components can be mounted on circuit boards attached to stack end plates, 

significantly reducing mass and volume of non-flow-through PEMFC systems 1.2 0.000

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

ma/cm2

volts

Orientation - 1g

Power at 1000 ma/cm2 = 27.52 watts

Infinity Single Cell Performance Plot

Infinity Single Cell Test Article

Current density (mA/cm2)

0 1000

3D Packaging 

Concept Model of 

Balance-of-Plant 

Components

Volts

0.0

WBS 3.2.2 Balance of Plant and System Testing

MS 3.2.2-1 Lab Stack #1 System Testing Complete

PT: Energy Storage

PM: Carolyn Mercer

PI: Mark Hoberecht

Objective:Objective:

Develop non-flow-through fuel cell technology at baseline stack vendor Infinity Fuel Cells and Hydrogen, Inc. 

for Exploration missions. Integrate Infinity Lab Stack #1 (4-cell, 50 cm2) with a GRC-developed balance-ofplant and conduct performance evaluation testing at GRC.

Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Partners: Infinity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, GRC

• 11/30/08 – Infinity Lab Stack #1 System Testing Complete

• The fabrication and testing of this small-area (50 cm2) shortstack (4 cells) using JPL MEAs with a GRC-developed 

balance-of-plant is one of several non-flow-through fuel cell 

system tests used to evaluate the performance of a stack 

integrated with a balance-of-plant. 

Significance:

• The milestone represents the first successful testing at the 

system level of a non-flow-through fuel cell stack integrated 

with a balance-of-plant.

Shown: Infinity Lab Stack #1 integrated 

with GRC balance-of-plant

NASA/TM—2011-216963 12
WBS 3.2.1.1 Baseline Stacks

Milestone 3.2.1.1-1 Lab Stack #2 Unit Delivery 

PT: Energy Storage

PM: Carolyn Mercer

PI: Mark Hoberecht

Objective:Objective:

Develop non-flow-through fuel cell technology at baseline stack vendor Infinity Fuel Cells and Hydrogen, Inc. 

for Exploration missions. Incorporate GRC-developed passive flat-plate heat pipe technology and JPLdeveloped membrane-electrode-assembly (MEA) technology into Infinity fuel cell stacks for performance 

evaluation.

Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Partner: Infinity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen 

• 4/30/09 – Lab Stack #2 Unit Delivery from Infinity to GRC

• This small-area (50 cm2) short-stack (4 cells) delivery is one 

of several stack deliveries used to evaluate the development 

progress of non-flow-through fuel cell technology from 

baseline fuel cell vendor Infinity Fuel Cells and Hydrogen, Inc. 

This stack also incorporates NASA-developed technology in 

the form of passive flat-plate heat pipes (GRC) and advanced 

MEAs (JPL).

Shown: Infinity Lab Stack #2 with JPL 

MEAs and GRC flat-plate heat pipes 

(protruding fins of heat pipes visible 

behind blue tie rods)

( )

Significance Significance:

• Passive flat-plate heat pipes are an alternative to pumpedliquid cooling loops in fuel cells, and offer the potential of 

better heat transfer, higher reliability, and lower parasitic 

power.

• Advanced fuel cell MEAs with better electrical performance 

will deliver more power from a fixed quantity of hydrogen and 

oxygen reactants.

Energy Storage Project Recent Accomplishments: 

Integrated Balance-of-Plant Components for Fuel Cells

 Integrated balance-of-plant demonstrated in 

conjunction with the laboratory scale fuel 

cell stacks 

 During this testing, the balance-of-plant ran

SolenoidValves Pressure

Transducers

During this testing, the balance of plant ran Pressure Accumulator

on a battery source consuming less than

10 W of parasitic power to operate the fuel 

cell system

 A full-scale (3-kW fuel cell system) balanceof-plant will likely operate on less than

50 W of parasitic power (same number of 

components, but some components larger)

 A 2-12 kW flow-thru fuel cell system tested 

Pressure

Regulator

Pressure

Transducers

Pressure Accumulator

at GRC required several hundred watts of 

parasitic power during operation

 That difference in parasitic power means 

that Altair would need almost 100 kg less 

reactants over the course of its 2-3 week 

mission using a non-flow-through fuel cell 

system versus a flow-through system

Pressure

Regulator

NASA/TM—2011-216963 13
Milestone Accomplishments 

3.2.1.1-2 Lab Stack #3 Unit Delivery

3.2.2.2-4 BOP for Lab Stack #3 Complete

3.2.2.2-5 Lab Stack #3 System Testing Complete

3.5-1 Lab Stack #3 MEA Delivery

PT: Energy Storage

PM: Carolyn Mercer

PI: Mark Hoberecht

Objective:Objective:

Develop non-flow-through fuel cell technology at baseline stack vendor Infinity Fuel Cells and Hydrogen, Inc. 

for Exploration missions. Incorporate advanced membrane-electrode-assemblies (MEAs) with better 

electrical performance into fuel cell stacks. Integrate Infinity Lab Stack #3 (4-cell, 50 cm2) with a GRCdeveloped balance-of-plant and conduct performance evaluation testing at GRC.

Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Partners: Infinity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, JPL, GRC 

• 3/25/09 – Lab Stack #3 MEA Delivery from JPL to Infinity

• 3/31/09 – Lab Stack #3 Unit Delivery from Infinity to GRC

• 3/31/09 – Balance-of-Plant for Lab Stack #3 Complete

• 4/30/09 – Infinity Lab Stack #3 Testing Complete

• The fabrication and testing of this small-area (50 cm2) shortstack (4 cells) using JPL MEAs with a GRC-developed 

balance-of-plant is one of several non-flow-through fuel cell 

system tests used to evaluate the performance of a stack system tests used to evaluate the performance of a stack

integrated with a balance-of-plant. 

Significance:

• System testing of Lab Stack #3 revealed several additional 

stack design modifications and balance-of-plant procedure 

adjustments which are both needed to resolve system 

performance deficiencies.

• These changes will be implemented in subsequent hardware 

builds and evaluated through additional testing.

Shown: Infinity Lab Stack #3 

and test rig with fuel cell system 

(stack + balance-of-plant)

Non-Flow-Through Fuel Cell Tec Through Fuel Cell Technology: Recent Progress ogy: Recent Progress

Key Accomplishments:

• Delivery of 4-cell, 150 cm2 non-flow-through fuel cell 

stack incorporating advanced manufacturing process.

• First successful continuous testing of a non flow through

Objective: 

Generate data showing performance of a non-flow-through fuel cell stack having a full-size active area.

Lab-scale non-flow-through fuel cell 

stack under test

Partners: Infinity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, NASA

• First successful continuous testing of a non-flow-through

fuel cell for 100 hr.

• Test data showed successful operation, with performance 

exceeding all prior small area stacks.

• Innvotive Hydrogen Pump used to increase operation 

time between purges

Significance Significance:

• Demonstrates the feasibility of non-flow-through fuel cell 

technology for Exploration missions

• Eliminates a substantial program risk associated with 

scale-up of non up of non-flow through fuel cell technology from a flow through fuel cell technology from a

laboratory size to the final flight hardware active area.

• Validates the decision to develop non-flow-through fuel 

cell technology over the previous flow-through 

technology.

• The 150 cm2 cell size is optimum for full-size stacks 

anticipated for 120 VDC Exploration applications such as 

Altair and Lunar Surface Systems. 

• Future Work:

• Build 1⁄4-scale breadboard, then 3-kW Engineering Model Schematic image of future 3 kW nonflow-through fuel cell stack

NASA/TM—2011-216963 14
Non-Flow-Through Fuel Cell: Common Test Bed

• Configurable to test stacks provided by multiple vendors

• Capable of testing total output power of 1 kWe

• Capable of testing stacks up to 40 cells

• Capable of conducting un-attended life testing

• Developed and built using COTS hardware

El i

Co

External Syste

m

Reactant 

Management

Electronics

Module

Power 

Interface

Module

mmon Test Bed (CTB)

Communication Bus

Sensor/Actuator

Power

Reactants (H2 & O2)

Heat

Water/Coolant

m

Fuel Cell Stack

DC

110 Vac

DC

DEC 

2009

Infinity Non-Flow-Through Fuel Cell Stack Progression

APR 

2009

APR 

2009

JUL DEC 

JUL 

2009

2005 2007

NASA/TM—2011-216963 15
Shuttle 

“Active BOP” 

Alkaline

“Active BOP”

PEM

Glenn

Research Center

Johnson

Space Center

Glenn

Research Center

“Passive BOP”

PEM

“Passive BOP”

PEM

Glenn

Research Center

17 - 20 psia

TP PT

PT

PT5

PT6

TP

TP5

TP6

TP PT

TP3 PT3

TP PT

M1 RV1

COOLANT

OXYGEN PURGE 3/4" **

AS4395-12 Male flare

fitting

OXYGEN* Supply to 3/8" **

AS4395-06 Male flare fitting

PR1

PR2

FC1

WT1

PT

PT1

PT2

PRODUCT WATER 1/4"

AS4395-04 Male flare fitting

CATHODE 19 psia +/- 3

HYDROGEN* Supply to 1/4" **

AS4395-04 Male flare fitting

TP

TP1

TP2

SV1

SV2

ANODE

POWERPLANT FACILITY

T1

Accumulator

with bellows

MV1

H1

HYDROGEN PURGE 1/2" **

AS4395-08 Male flare fitting

SV3

RV2

TP PT

PT4 SV4 TP4

M2

WT2

HX2

MV2

100 - 275 psia

Temp > 10 C

21 psia +/- 2

19 psia +/- 3

19 psia +/- 3

21 psia +/- 3

17 psia

21 psia +/- 2 100 - 275 psia

Temp > 10 C

17 - 20 psia

50 - 56 deg C

17 -20 psia

44 - 50 deg C

3/4" Primary Coolant Loop

30 psia +/- 2

32 psia +/- 2

45 psia +/- 2

PT

PT

PT7

PT8

M3

Secondary Coolant Loop

HX1

PRIMARY COOLANT INLET 3/4"

AS4395-12 Male flare fitting

PRIMARY COOLANT OUTLET 3/4"

AS4395-12 Male flare fitting

25 +/- 10 deg C

50 - 56 deg C

44 - 56 deg C

17 - 20 psia

PRODUCT WATER 1/4"

AS4395-04 Male flare fitting

44 - 56 deg C

Hydrogen pressure manifold

Oxygen pressure manifold

Flow-Through Flow-Through Flow-Through

anode

cathode

H O2

MEA

H2O

H2O

H2O

coolant

hydrophilic membrane

anode

cathode

H O2

MEA

H2O

H2O

H2O

coolant

hydrophilic membrane

anode

cathode

coolant

MEA

H2O

passive water 

separator H2O H2O

O2

O2 / H2O

anode

cathode

coolant

MEA

H2O

passive water 

separator H2O H2O

O2

O2 / H2O

Non-Flow-Through

Active coolant 

pump 

(coolant loop 

not shown)

H2 O2 injector/ejector

H2 O2

Active Mechanical Component

(pump, active water separator) = Passive Mechanical Component

(injector/ejector, passive water separator) =

Fuel Cell Technology Progression to Simpler Balance-of-Plant

Active coolant 

pump 

(coolant loop 

not shown)

PEMFC System Comparison (cont’d)

1-kW Flow-Throug y h PEMFC System

3-kW Non-Flow-Through 

PEMFC System

(mock-up)

NASA/TM—2011-216963 16
Fuel Cell Predicted Performance

• Test data shows that even with existing heavy endplates, power density of current 

hardware nearly matches that of SOA Shuttle alkaline flight hardware:

• 59 kg non-flow-through stack (endplates 17 kg) + 10 kg BoP @ 3 kW = 44 W/kg

• SOA Shuttle alkaline @ 6 kW = 49 W/kg 

• Note: KPP threshold and goal power density values are based on 300 cm2 Note: KPP threshold and goal power density values are based on 300 cm hardware hardware

(for 30 V systems), which is more mass efficient than smaller 150 cm2 hardware (for 

120 V systems). Our current expectations for 3 kW performance are based on test 

results from 4-cell stacks, and assume a 4-screen design, 4 kg flightweight endplates, 

and a 10 kg BOP. The expected 3 kW performance ranges from:

• 66 W/kg for the stack and 54 W/kg for the system, assuming a 4-chamber cell 

(separate cavities for coolant and product water); to

• 125 W/kg for the stack and 88 W/kg for the system, assuming a 3-chamber cell 

(combined water/coolant cavity) and additional mass optimization.

• Next steps are to build successively taller stacks to move toward 1/4 scale breadboard 

(40 cells, 1 kW, 150 cm2) while retaining the excellent power density

• Voltage, lifetime, and some mass KPP’s not specifically addressed in current fiscal year

• Optimization for voltage not in current year scope, although some conductive 

coatings will be investigated

• Lifetime testing not in current year scope

• Mass optimization not in current year scope, although replacing metallic porous 

plate with Supor membrane for mass reduction will be investigated

WBS 3.2.1.2 Alternative Stacks

Milestone 3.2.1.2-1 SBIR Stack Delivery

PT: Energy Storage

PM: Carolyn Mercer

PI: Mark Hoberecht

Objective:Objective:

Develop non-flow-through fuel cell technology at alternative stack vendor ElectroChem, Inc. for Exploration 

missions. Integrate this ElectroChem stack with a GRC-developed balance-of-plant and deliver to JSC for 

performance evaluation testing.

Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Partners: ElectroChem, GRC, JSC

• 4/30/09 – ElectroChem Alternative Stack Delivery to GRC

• This small-area (50 cm2) short-stack (4 cells) delivery will be 

used to evaluate the development progress of non-flowthrough fuel cell technology from alternative fuel cell vendor 

ElectroChem, Inc.

Significance:

• Several fuel cell stack vendors are developing non-flowthrough fuel cell technology as an alternative to the baseline 

stack technology under development. This approach increases 

competition and reduces risk. Shown: ElectroChem alternative non-flowthrough fuel cell stack (4-cell short stack)

NASA/TM—2011-216963 17
Key Accomplishment/Deliverable/Milestone:

• Completed testing of single-cell unitized regenerative fuel cell (URFC) system in NASA GRC 

test facility

• Accepted delivery of 10-cell URFC stack from Proton Energy Systems

Significance:

3.4 Regenerative Fuel Cell Technology Development

• URFC performs both fuel cell and electrolysis functions in a single stack; reduced RFC stack 

mass and volume, but higher system mass and volume due to lower efficiency in both fuel 

cell and electrolysis operating modes

Plans for FY’08 and beyond:

• Conduct performance testing of 10-cell URFC

system in NASA GRC test facility

• Perform study/design of reactant management

integration hardware required for RFC system

with separate fuel cell and electrolysis stacks

URFC System

Batteries

• Goals

• Approach

• Component Development

• Cell Development

• Predicted Cell Level Performance

NASA/TM—2011-216963 18
Customer Need Performance 

Parameter

State-of-the-Art Current Value Threshold 

Value

Goal

Safe, reliable 

operation

No fire or flame Instrumentation/controllers used to prevent 

unsafe conditions. 

There is no nonflammable electrolyte in 

SOA

Preliminary results 

indicate a small reduction 

in performance using 

safer electrolytes and 

cathode coatings

Tolerant to electrical and 

thermal abuse such as 

over-temperature, overcharge, reversal, and 

short circuits with no fire 

or flame***

Tolerant to electrical and 

thermal abuse such as 

over-temperature, overcharge, reversal, and 

short circuits with no fire 

or flame***

Specific energy

Lander:

150-210 Wh/kg

10 l

Battery-level

specific energy*

[Wh/kg]

90 Wh/kg at C/10 & 30 °C

83 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0 °C

(MER rovers)

160 at C/10 & 30 oC (HE)

170 at C/10 & 30 oC (UHE)

80 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0 oC

( di t d)

135 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“High-Energy”**

150 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“Ult Hi h E ”**

150 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“High-Energy”

220 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“Ult Hi h E ”

Key Performance Parameters for Battery Technology Development

10 cycles

Rover:

160-200 Wh/kg

2000 cycles

EVA:

270Wh/kg

100 cycles

[ g] (predicted) “Ultra-High Energy”** “Ultra-High Energy”

Cell-level specific 

energy

[Wh/kg]

130 Wh/kg at C/10 & 30 °C

118 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0 °C

199 at C/10 & 23 oC (HE)

213 at C/10 & 23 oC (UHE)

100 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0 oC

(predicted)

165 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“High-Energy”

180 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“Ultra-High Energy”

180 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“High-Energy”

260 Wh/kg at C/10 & 0°C 

“Ultra-High Energy”

Cathode-level

specific capacity

[mAh/g]

180 mAh/g 252 mAh/g at C/10 & 25 oC

190 mAh/g at C/10 & 0 oC

260 mAh/g at C/10 & 0°C 280 mAh/g at C/10 & 0°C 

Anode-level

specific capacity

[mAh/g]

280 mAh/g (MCMB) 330 @ C/10 & 0 oC (HE)

1200 mAh/g @ C/10 & 0 oC 

for 10 cycles (UHE)

600 mAh/g at C/10 & 0°C 

“Ultra-High Energy”

1000 mAh/g at C/10 0°C

“Ultra-High Energy”

Revised 4/8/10

Energy density

Lander: 311 Wh/l

Rover: TBD

EVA: 400 Wh/l

Battery-level

energy density

250 Wh/l n/a 270 Wh/l “High-Energy”

360 Wh/l “Ultra-High”

320 Wh/l “High-Energy”

420 Wh/l “Ultra-High”

Cell-level energy 

density

320 Wh/l n/a 385 Wh/l “High-Energy”

460 Wh/l “Ultra-High”

390 Wh/l “High-Energy”

530 Wh/l “Ultra-High”

Operating 

environment

0 to 30 oC, Vacuum

Operating 

Temperature

-20 to 40 oC 0 to 30 oC 0 to 30 oC 0 to 30 oC

Assumes prismatic cell packaging for threshold values. Goal values include lightweight battery packaging.

* Battery values are assumed at 100% DOD, discharged at C/10 to 3.0 V/cell, and at 0 oC operating conditions

** ”High-Energy” = mixed metal oxide cathode with graphite anode

** “Ultra-High Energy” = mixed metal oxide cathode with Silicon composite anode

*** Over-temperature up to 110 oC; reversal 150% excess discharge @ 1C; pass external and simulated internal short 

tests; overcharge 100% @ 1C for Goal and 80% @ C/5 for Threshold Value.

Anode (commercial)

Anode (NASA)

Cathode (NASA)

Li(LiNMC)O2 

NASA Cathode

High Ultra-High

E

Energy Storage Project Cell Development for Batteries

Electrolyte (NASA)

Separator (commercial)

Safety devices (NASA)

incorporated into cell

Conventional

Carbonaceous Anode

Si-composite 

NASA Anode

Energy

Cell

Energy

Cell

“High Energy” Cell

Baseline for EVA and Rover

Lithiated-mixed-metal-oxide cathode/Graphite anode

Li(LiNMC)O2/Conventional carbonaceous anode

150 Wh/kg (100% DOD) @ battery-level 0 C C/10

80% capacity retention at ~2000 cycles

“Ultra-High Energy” Cell

Upgrade for EVA and Altair, possibly Rover

Lithiated-mixed-metal-oxide cathode/Silicon composite anode

Li(LiNMC)O2/silicon composite

220 Wh/kg (100% DOD) @ battery-level 0 C C/10

80% capacity retention at ~200 cycles

NASA/TM—2011-216963 19
FY09 FY10

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 H1 H2 Q4

Component Development

FY11 FY12 FY13

H1 H2 H1 H1H2 H2

Lithium-Ion Battery Master Schedule 

FY14

Q3

NASA TRL 5/6 Testing

H1 H2

FY15

High Energy 

SDR PDR

Lander - Altair SRR

SRR

PDR

EVA (Suit 2 Config)

LSS PDR

CDR

CDR

MCR

Integrated 

Component 

Down-select

Flightweight 

Cell A

Scale-up and 

Cell Build

Screen, scale-up, 

cell design

Component Development NASA TRL 5/6 Testing

Environmental 

Testing 

Complete

BASIC A OPTION 

1A

Environmental 

Testing 

Complete

Battery

Ultra-High 

Energy Battery

Scale-up and 

Cell Build High Energy 

Cell “A”

Integrated Component 

Down-Select 1 & 2 

Screen, scale-up, 

cell design

Scale-up 

and Cell Build

Flightweight

Cell B

Complete

BASIC B

OPTION 

1B

Scale-up and 

Cell Build #1

Scale-up and 

Cell Build #2

#1 #2

Pack level testing of 

Li-ion cells

Fault isolation 

electronics studies

and design

Ultra-High

Energy Cell

“B”

Safety, Packaging 

and Control

Sep. 23, 2009

Lithium Ion Battery Technology Development

Advanced Cell Components

Cathode

- +

eNano-particle based 

circuit breaker

Anode

Layered Li(NMC)O2

cathode particle

• Varying composition 

and morphology to 

improve capacity and 

charge/discharge rate

Charger or 

Load

eO

|

Li

|

O

|

Ni Mn Co

Optimized Solid-Electrolyte interface Layer

• Mitigates causes of irreversible capacity

Li+

Cat ode

Improving Cell-Level Safety

• Nano-particle circuit breaker

Li+

Li+

Li+

Li+

Li+

Li+

Separator Li+

Li+

Li

Li+

Li+

Li+

Li+

Li+

Anode

Silicon nano-particles 

alloy with Li during 

charge, lose Li ions 

during discharge

• Offers dramatically 

improved capacity over 

carbon standard

Li-Metal-PO4

Safety Coating for 

Thermal Stability

Collector

Collector

Advanced electrolyte with additives provides

NixMnyCoz |

O

|

Li

|

O

|

NixMnyCoz

.

.

.

• Nano-particle circuit breaker, 

flame-retardant electrolytes, and

cathode coatings to increase the thermal 

stability of the cell. 

Goal: no fire or flame, even under abuse. Li+

• Porous, elastomeric binder allows ionic 

transport and accommodates large 

volume changes during 

charge/discharge cycling

• Functionalized nanoparticles adhere to 

binder without blocking reactive silicon 

surface area

Li

Li+

Li+

Providing Ultra High Specific Energy

• Silicon-composite anodes to significantly improve 

capacity; elastomeric binders and nanostructures to 

achieve ~200 cycles

• Novel layered oxide cathode with lithium-excess 

compositions (Li[LixNiyMnzCo1-x-y-z]O2) to improve 

capacity

Advanced electrolyte with additives provides

flame-retardance and stability at high voltages 

without sacrificing performance. 

Example: LiPF6 Li in EC+EMC+TPP+VC 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 20
• Develop silicon-based carbon 

composite materials

– Much higher theoretical capacity 

than carbonaceous materials

Anode Development

Led by William Bennett, ASRC at NASA GRC

1600

1800

Cycle Performance of 11‐monthAnode Deliverables

rate

C/10

• Development focus on:

– Decreasing irreversible capacity 

loss

– Increasing cycling stability by 

reducing impact of volume 

expansion 

– Improving cycle life

Sili b d d S ifi it

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1 7 13 19 25 31 37 43

mAh/g

Cycle Number

LM

GT 2B

GT 2A

ETDP‐ 71,77, 81

C/10

• Anode Development at: 

– Georgia Tech Research Institute

– Lockheed Martin

– Glenn Research Center

Silicon-based anodes: Specific capacity vs. 

cycles for three materials at C/10 and 23 °C 

in coin cell half cell.

Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Concha Reid, NASA GRC

“Advanced Nanostructured Silicon Composite Anode Program”

PI: Dr. Justin Golightly, Lockheed Martin

Anode Development

NASA Contract # NNC08CB02C

Objective:Objective:

To develop an optimized silicon nanoparticle anode with a 

novel elastomeric binder that will mitigate capacity fade 

and enable long cycle. 

Approach: 1800

LM 11‐month deliverable at 0°C

pp

• Functionalize nanoparticles to covalently adhere with 

binder

• Optimize binder to manage volume changes during 

cycling

• Optimize anode properties to meet capacity, temperature 

and life requirements

Accomplishments:

• Anode exceeded 1000 mAh/g when tested in a full cell 

with an NMC cathode (NEI-D) at room temperature. 

Performance has stayed good through all 5 cycles to 

date

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

123456789

mAh/g

Cycle Number

A

B

C

D

Avg

ETDP‐91

C/2 C/5

C/10

date.

• Anode samples demonstrated >1000 mAh/g at C/10 for 

40 cycles at room temperature in half cell testing. 

• The KPP goal for the anode specific capacity of 

1000 mAh/g at C/10 and 0 oC has been demonstrated 

over more than 10 cycles.

• Anode tested in a full cell with Saft’s NCA cathode and 

tested for 230 cycles at 40% depth of discharge. Longterm cycling stability was demonstrated with this 

electrode pair, but capacity imbalance between 

electrodes limited performance. 

Preliminary results for unoptimized materials are shown. 

Materials were tested at NASA in coin cell half cells.

Challenge:

Anode specific capacity fade rates are 

still too high to meet the goal of 200 

cycles at the cell level. 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 21
Anode Development

NASA Contract # NNC08CB01C

Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Richard Baldwin, NASA GRC

“Design of Resilient Silicon Anodes”

Dr. Gleb Yushin & Dr. Tom Fuller, Georgia Institute of Technology

Dr. Igor Luzinov, Clemson University

Objective:Objective: Objective:Objective: Georgia Tech Anode 2A at 0°C

To address the NASA “ultra-high energy cell” 

performance metrics, develop a practical siliconbased anode cell component with demonstrated high 

capacity and cycle life.

Approach:Approach:

Optimize a (nano)silicon-based anode structure by 

utilizing a novel elastic epoxidized polybutadiene 

(EPB) binder so as to permit sufficient elastic 

deformations during detrimental volume changes 

associated with lithium silicon alloying and de

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

mAh/g

Georgia Tech Anode 2A at 0 C

A

B

D

Avg

C/10 C/5 C/2 C/10

associated with lithium-silicon alloying and dealloying. 

Accomplishments:

• Anode samples demonstrated >1000 mAh/g at C/10 

for 10 cycles at room temperature in half cell 

testing. 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

data at 0°C Cycle Number

ETDP 77

ETDP‐79

Preliminary results for unoptimized materials are shown. 

Materials were tested at NASA in coin cell half cells.

Challenge:

Anode specific capacity fade rates are 

still too high to meet the goal of 200 

cycles at the cell level. 

GRC In-House Anode Synthesis

PI: Jim Woodworth, NPP,NASA GRC

Resorcinol Formaldehyde (RF) Gels

• Resorcinol- formaldehyde resin formed in water

• Formed into monoliths

• Formed into microspheres Formed into microspheres

• Silicon or other materials may be added to the 

material

• Materials are freeze dried and pyrolyzed to form 

the carbonaceous anode material

Silicon Sputter Coated Carbon Fiber Paper

• Apply Si to an active support material that is 

also capable of acting as a current collector

42

also capable of acting as a current collector

• 50 nm Si Coating Silicon

Silicon Sputter Coated Copper

• 50 nm Si coating

• Used to study lithiation of silicon

NASA/TM—2011-216963 22
Cathode Development

Led by Kumar Bugga, NASA JPL

• Develop Li(NMC) materials

– Offer enhanced thermal 

stability over conventional 

cobaltate cathodes cobaltate cathodes

– High voltage materials

• Development focus on:

– Increasing specific capacity

– Improving rate capability

– Stabilizing materials for 

higher voltage operation

– Reducing irreversible 250

300

/kg

1200

1400

Thermal Stability Increases

Synthesis methods affect tap density

g

capacity loss

– Increasing tap density

• Cathode Development at: 

– University of Texas at Austin

– NEI Corporation

– JPL

0

50

100

150

200

LiCoO2 Li(NiCo)O2 Li(NMC)O2 Li(NiMn)O2 Projcected

Cathode Material Development

Sp. Capacity, Wh/

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Sp. 

Wh/kg

Energy, 

Adding transition metals improves thermal stability

Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Richard Baldwin, NASA GRC

TM: Kumar Bugga, NASA JPL

Cathode Development

NASA Contract # NNC09CA08C

ObjectiveObjective:

Develop LiNMCO2 cathode materials with high 

capacity and low irreversible capacity (IRC) loss. 

“Development of High Capacity Layered Oxide Cathodes”

PI: Dr. Arumugam Manthiram, University of Texas at Austin

291 mAh/g

ApproachApproach:

• Vary composition of base material to maximize 

discharge capacity with low IRC loss.

• Modify cathode surface with metal oxide coatings to 

increase capacity and decrease the IRC.

• Dope samples with titanium to increase capacity.

Accomplishments

• Surface modified samples demonstrate higher 

capacity, lower irreversible capacity loss, and more P li i lt f hi h t d it t i l i i ll

~210 mAh/g

capacity, lower irreversible capacity loss, and more

stable cyclability after 25 cycles as compared to 

unmodified cathode sample.

• Tap density increased to 1.6 g/cc to accommodate 

Saft’s manufacturing process, but specific capacity 

degraded (down to ~210 mAh/g from 252 at 3.0 V)

Preliminary results of high tap density material in coin cell

half cell. 1st cycle data shown. The discharge capacity is 

slightly lower than anticipated, but increases after a few cycles 

to ~ 230 mAh/g at C/10.

Challenge:

0 oC capacity is very poor (~30% reduction). Even 

at room temperature, the specific capacity remains 

below 260 mAh/g. 

High first cycle irreversible capacity loss.(~30% at 

room temperature).

NASA/TM—2011-216963 23
Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Concha Reid, NASA GRC

TM: Will West, NASA JPL

Cathode Development

NASA Contract # NNC09CA07C

ObjectiveObjective:

Develop a LiNMC cathode material with a 

unique structure, composition, and a fine-

“Mixed Metal Composite Oxides for High Energy Li-ion Batteries”

PI: Dr. Nader Hagh, NEI Corporation

grained particle morphology. Synthesize 

materials using a scalable and low cost process.

ApproachApproach:

• Understand ordering and produce a highly 

ordered structure 

• Ultra fine particle crystallization using solid 

state reactions

• Structure refinement 

Accomplishments:

• Produced several variants of LiNMCO2 cathode 

materials

• Demonstrated stability over a wide operating 

voltage window (4.8 to 2.5 V).

• Successfully synthesized powders with tap 

densities above 2.0 g/cc.

Preliminary results of unoptimized materials are shown. 

Materials were tested at NASA in coin cell half cells.

Challenge:

0 oC performance is very poor (~40% reduction).

High first cycle irreversible capacity loss.(~24% at R.T.).

Electrolyte Development

Led by Marshall Smart, NASA JPL

• Develop advanced electrolytes with additives:

– Non-flammable electrolytes and flame retardant additives

– Stable at potentials up to 5 V 

– Compatible with the NASA chemistries Compatible with the NASA chemistries

• Development focus on:

– Reducing flammability

– Stabilizing materials for higher voltage operation

– Compatibility with mixed-metal-oxide cathodes and silicon 

composite anodes

• Electrolyte Development at: Electrolyte Development at:

– JPL

– Yardney Technical Products/University of Rhode Island

NASA/TM—2011-216963 24
JPL In-House Electrolyte Development

Led by Marshall Smart, NASA JPL

ObjectiveObjective:

• To develop flame retardant electrolytes for Li-ion 

cells that are stable up to 5.0 V.

ApproachApproach:

• Determine best formulation for low-flammability 

th t i i t t ith hi h that is consistent with high-volt i d age mixed-met l a -

oxide cathodes, and with graphite and silicon 

composite anodes:

• Vary concentration of triphenyl phosphate 

additives

• Test both linear and cyclic fluorinated 

carbonates as non-flammable solvents.

Accomplishments:

• JPL Gen #1 Electrolyte has <50% heat release, 

<25% pressure rise, and >33% faster flame 

Comparable performance was obtained with the JPL Gen #2 

electrolytes (containing LiBOB) compared with the baseline solution.

Self-extinguishing time (SET) flammability tests show excellent 

flame retardance in JPL and Yardney/URI electrolytes. 

p

extinction compared to Saft electrolyte, but 

showed poor compatibility with NMC cathodes.

• JPL Gen #2 electrolytes (containing LiBOB) now 

shows good performance with graphite/NMC 

electrodes, and has lower flammability because 

of increased TPP content (10%).

Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Richard Baldwin, NASA GRC

TM: Marshall Smart, NASA JPL

Electrolyte Development 

NASA Contract # NNC09CA06C

ObjectiveObjective:

• To develop flame retardant electrolytes for Li-ion cells 

“Flame Retardant, Electrochemically Stable Electrolyte for Lithium-Ion Batteries”

PI: Dr. Boris Ravdel, Yardney Technical Products

Collaborator: Dr. Brett Lucht, University of Rhode Island (URI)

• that are stable up to 5.0 V.

ApproachApproach:

• Characterize electrochemical stability of baseline 

electrolyte solution at and above 5 V

• Examine flame retardant properties of baseline 

electrolyte with additives

• Characterize effect of additives on electrochemical 

• stability

• Analyze performance of cells containing the developed Analyze performance of cells containing Rate capability at 23 °C of electrolyte with lowest the developed

electrolytes

Accomplishments:

• Flame retardant electrolytes were formulated

• Tests performed on 12 Ah cells made with developed 

electrolyte formulations 

(effort completed December 2009)

Rate capability at 23 C of electrolyte with lowest

Self-extinguishing time (left):

0.95 M LiPF6 + 0.05M LiBOB EC+EMC+DMMP 

(30:55:15 wt %) developed by Yardney Technical 

Products

NASA/TM—2011-216963 25
Separators and Safety Components

Separators

Led by Richard Baldwin, NASA GRC

• S t ith i d f t Separators with improved safety 

• Shutdown separators

• Optimized for ETDP chemistry

Safety Component 

Development

Led by Judy Jeevarajan, NASA JSC

• Development of internal cell materials 

(active or inactive) designed to improve 

the inherent safety of the cell

• Functional components

• Safety Component Development at: 

– Physical Sciences, Inc.

– Giner

Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Judy Jeevarajan, NASA JSC

Safety Component Development

NASA Contract # NNC09CA04C

ObjectiveObjective:

•Coat metal oxide cathodes with lithium metal phosphate coatings to improve thermal stability. 

ApproachApproach:

“Metal Phosphate Coating for Improved Cathode Safety”

PI: Dr. Christopher Lang, Physical Sciences Corporation

•Coat LiCoO2 cathodes using 1 and 2% lithium metal phosphate solutions

•Optimize coatings to increase onset temperature of exothermic peak or eliminate peak 

Accomplishments:

• Demonstrated no loss in discharge capacity 

for uncoated cathode compared to cathode 

with ~1.5% LiCoPO4 coating (results reported 

for 1 cycle)

• Demonstrated robust adhesion of coating in 

half cells for 200 cycles, cycling at C-rate with 

capacity retention of ~90 of 1st cycle capacity

• Demonstrated to reduce exotherms without 

reducing performance on high voltage 

cathodes (Toda). Preliminary results show complete suppression of 

exotherm with coated LiCoO2 cathode.

Next step:

Determine compatibility with MPG-111/NMC full cell.

NASA/TM—2011-216963 26
Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Judy Jeevarajan, NASA JSC

Safety Component Development

NASA Contract # NNC09CA05C

ObjectiveObjective:

To develop the compositions and fabrication methods for integration of a Composite Thermal 

Switch into Li-ion cells.

“Control of Internal and External Short Circuits in Lithium-Ion Batteries”

PI: Dr. Robert McDonald, Giner Incorporated

ApproachApproach:

•Optimize a switch temperature for safe handling of 

short circuits in Li- ion cells (switch activation causes a 

resistance increase at surface of coated electrode).

•Build Li-ion cells to demonstrate the concept and 

effect using externally applied heat and hard shorts.

•Perform electrochemical testing to confirm that safety 

improvements do not compromise performance.

Accomplishments: Prior work for Li primary cells Activation of switch

• Switch coated on both copper and aluminum substrates

• Coatings deposited in different thicknesses to compare switch 

behavior as a function of temperature

• Non-uniform switching behavior and resistance observed on samples

Prior work for Li primary cells. Activation of switch

at ~173 °C yields >108 fold increase in resistance.

Challenge:

Repeatable, consistent switching behavior.

• Assess NASA-developed 

components

– Build and test electrodes and 

screening cells

– Provide manufacturing 

perspective from the start

Cell Development

Led by Tom Miller, NASA GRC

p p

• Scale-up NASA-developed 

components

– Transition components from the 

lab to the manufacturing floor

• Build and test evaluation cells (10 Ah):

– Determine component interactions

– Determine cell-level performance

• Design flightweight cells (35 Ah)

– Identify high risk elements early

NASA/TM—2011-216963 27
Component screening:

UT Austin increased the tap density of their cathode to provide manufacturability;

Saft modified their electrode processing to be compatible with Giner’s thermal switch;

Georgia Tech will modify their binder additives to be compatible with Saft’s anode 

f ti

“Advanced Lithium-Based Chemistry Cell Development”

PI: Dr. Bob Staniewicz, Saft America

Project: ETDP Energy Storage Project –

Space-rated Lithium-ion Batteries

COTR: Tom Miller, NASA GRC

Cell Development 

NASA Contract # NNC09BA04B

manufacturing process.

Toda-9100 identified as baseline cathode.

Baseline cells: graphite anode (MPG-111), nickel-cobalt cathode (NCA)

DD cells (10 Ah, cylindrical): fabricated and under test.

34P cells(45 Ah, prismatic): fabricated, activated, and delivered.

Flightweight cells (35 Ah, prismatic): PDR held May, 2010

Flightweight cell design predicted to meet 185 Wh/kg at 25 C,

and possibly 194 Wh/kg (using a proposed design change in the bussing 

configuration) 0 C predictions below current baseline DD Cells

34PCell

configuration). 0 C predictions below current baseline.

Basic

(34 months)

Option 1

Flightweight Cell Fabrication (18 months)

High Energy Cell

• Component screening and evaluation 

for manufacturing suitability

• Component material scale-up

• Electrode optimization

• Fabrication and delivery of 

evaluation screening cells

• Flightweight cell design

Fabrication and delivery of 12-48 (TBR) High 

Energy, ~35 Ah (TBR) flightweight cells that 

incorporate cell-level safety components.

Ultra High Energy 

Cell

Fabrication and delivery of 12-48 (TBR) Ultra 

High Energy, ~35 Ah (TBR) flightweight cells 

that incorporate cell-level safety components.

DD Cells

Key Accomplishment: Accomplishment:

Objective:Objective:

Develop a cell/battery design tool to aid 

in component materials assessments

Cell Development

Battery Estimator Rev. 13

0.95 cc elyte/Ah units flag 2

Electrochemical Projections %of base material grams wt% thickness thk., mils vol%

User input theor. potential (V) 4.1 100% user Pos 182.0728 52% Positive mix layer 2.56 46%

area basis 9083 cm2 capacity (Ah) 39.00 2600% user Neg 50.9804 14% Negative mix layer 1.65 29%

capacity 39.00 Ah energy (Wh) 134.56 2486% LiPF6/EC-DMC 46.9994 13% separator 0.79 14%

P/N_ratio 0.9 total weight (g) 353.06 1152% Celgard 2500 6.9485 2% positive collector 0.40 7%

Neg IrrCap% 10% total volume (cm3) 129.08 1006% Al 24.8981 7% negative collector 0.20 4%

PosPorosity 20% vol-% Wh/kg 381.12 216% Cu 41.1584 12% total 5.5951 100%

NegPorosity 40% vol-% Wh/dm3 1042.4 247% total 353.0576 100% bicell electrodes

VoltageEfficiency 84% % of theor. Ah/kg 110.46 226% pos electrode 206.97 pos electrode thk. 5.52

separator thk. 0.79 mils Ah/dm3 302.1 258% neg electrode 92.14 neg electrode thk. 3.49

Pos_Collector_thk 0.40 mils thk., (mils) 5.6 64% cell volume includes terminal length

Neg_Collector_thk 0.20 mils kg/dm3 2.735 115% Current case Wh/kg Wh/liter g current density

Ah/m2 42.94 166% electrochemical 381.12 1042.4 353.06 5 hr-rate

material selection Effective Volts 3.450 prismatic cell 343.82 652.4 391.36 7.8 Amps

Positive mix 1 capacity mAh/g active mat'l. net cylindrical cell 347.10 794.1 387.66 0.859 mA/cm2

10% 1 positive 280.0 214.2 battery, prismatic 273.85 544.0 3930.9

5% 3 negative 1000.0 765.0 battery, cylindrical 270.53 524.4 3979

density 2.735 g/cc

user Pos

Toggle thickness units Show %-of-baseline Set as baseline Restore

Kynar

Super-P

• Spread sheet developed that projects 

cell/battery level characteristics based on 

component level materials 

• Based on standard design configuration

• Configured to rapidly perform what-if? 

analyses

Significance:

• Aids in quantifying impact of incremental 

improvements in battery design materials 300

350

400

450

500

y (Wh/liter)

prismatic cell

cylindrical cell

theoretical

cells

Negative mix 1 total electrode mix 66.0% of total mass

10% 1

5% 3

Electrolyte 2

Separator film 2

Positive collector 1

Negative collector 2

mAh/g g/cc V vs. Li

"user" Positive

280.0 4.80 4.5

"user" Negative

1000.0 2.33 0.4

Component Weight Fraction

user Pos

user Neg

LiPF6/EC-DMC

Celgard 2500

Al

Cu 0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 200 400 600

Energy Density (Wh/liter)

Specific Energy (Wh/kg)

prismatic cell

cylindrical cell

theoretical

cells

batteries

user Neg

LiPF6/EC-DMC

Al

Cu

Celgard 2500

Kynar

Super-P

p y g

• Allows identification of critical factors which 

control cell/battery energy density and specific 

energy

• Provide engineering-accuracy forecasts of size 

and mass for cells and batteries

• Rate performance can be estimated from 

laboratory data for electrodes under relevant 

conditions

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 50 100 150 200

Specific Energy (Wh/kg)

Energy Density

batteries

NASA/TM—2011-216963 28
• Projected discharge profiles for cells using 

electrode voltage data 

 Based on electrode data at 23 and 0 °C

 Representative of fresh cell without many cycles

Cell-Level Specific Energy Prediction Results –

Using Current Component Data

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

tential (Volts)

High Energy

23 °C

• Cathode low-temperature performance 

produces very low specific energy at 0 °C

 Lower than SOA at 0 °C

 Specific energy at room temperature represents 

improvement over SOA

KPP at 0 °C model at 3 V cutoff

threshold goal 23 °C 0 °C

B li 150 173 156

2.0

2.5

3.0

0 100 200 300

Cell Pot

Wh/kg

23 C

0 °C

4 0

4.5

5.0

Volts)

Ultra High Energy

Baseline 150 173 156

HE 165 180 199 100

UHE 180 260 213 100

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

0 100 200 300

Cell Potential (

Wh/kg

23 °C

0 °C Baseline electrodes = MPG-111 and NCA

HE electrodes = MPG-111 and Li(LiNMC)O2 

UHE electrodes = Si-composite and Li(LiNMC)O2

• Expected performance should improve with further component development

5

4

3

L

I

K

E

L

Energy Storage Risk Assessment: Overall Project - Closed Risks

Summary Since December 2007 Major Re-plan

1

2

3 3

2

5

5

6



1 2345

2

1

L

I

H

O

O

D

CONSEQUENCES 

1

1 7 6







Explanation of risk closure before 

becoming “green”:

2010 





becoming green :

1. Constellation accepted late 

delivery of regenerative fuel 

cell so this project closed it 

as an Energy Storage risk.

2. Battery performance risk split 

into more detailed technical 

risks.

NASA/TM—2011-216963 29
5

4

3

L

I

K

E

L

Rank/

ID

Description Likelihood, Consequence 

Mitigation

Risk Mgmt Approach

1

ES-04

Battery 

safety: 

chemistries 

may pose 

unacceptable 

risks to the 

Less likely with lithium ion 

chemistry than with lithium 

metals. Potential 

consequence is 

spontaneous ignition 

causing loss of crew.

Address electrolyte flammability.

Include safety goals in NRA and RFP. 

Develop fault isolation electronics.

Carry “high energy” cell as fall back.

Energy Storage Risk Assessment: Overall Project – Open Risks

Summary Since December 2007 Major Re-plan

2 1

1



1 2345

2

1

L

I

H

O

O

D

CONSEQUENCES 

crew. (3, 5)

2

ES-03

Regenerative 

fuel cell life: 

10,000 hr 

reliable 

operation 

may not be 

achieved.

Highly likely that new 

system design will have 

unforseen problems that 

could limit life goal.

(4, 4)

Develop non-flow-through technology to 

eliminate balance-of-plant components 

(including the highest-failure-rate 

components) for both primary and 

regenerative fuel cell systems. 

Build fuel cell systems out of modular 

units to prevent single-point failures. 

Leverage SBIR/IBR for innovation.

3

ES-10

IPP/SBIR 

electrolysis 

funding not 

stable

IPP/SBIR funding likely to 

remain steady in FY09 and 

FY10. If not, high pressure 

electrolysis will not be ready 

for integration further

Focus SBIR solicitations on Energy 

Storage needs.

3

1. Li-ion chemistry selected.

2 P i f l ll i k l d





3

for integration further

impacting LSS schedule. 

(1, 4)

2. Primary fuel cell risk lowered; 

electrolysis still at low TRL.

3. Management structure of the 

SBIR program in flux.

2010

Rank/

Trend

Description Likelihood/Consequences Risk Mgt. Approach

1

ES13a

ES13b

There is uncertainty of 

the load profile and 

energy requirements 

within the Constellation 

Program

Trade studies based on limited program 

requirements may miss the key drivers 

associated with the energy storage technical 

focus.

Impact: Although there are iterative cycles to 

Define the power load profiles 

and mission requirements as 

early as possible.

Energy Storage Risk Assessment: Batteries

Status of Risks as Reported at Last TCR

5

4

L

I

K

E

1b 1a 2

13b Program.

1a) LSS

1B) EVA and Altair

Impact: Although there are iterative cycles to 

continuously review updated requirements, 

there are potential schedule impacts if 

significant re-work is necessary.

2

ES-14

Scale-up of critical 

materials to meet 

performance goals may 

not be compatible with 

existing manufacturing 

techniques or may 

require multiple requalifications.

The aerospace lithium-ion battery market is 

small in comparison with the commercial 

market sector and the commercial market 

drives the manufacturing process.

Impact: There is a risk that once the lithiumion cell design has been baselined, the 

suppliers may alter their manufacturing 

process and impact performance or 

necessitate re-qualification of the lithium-ion 

cell.

Contract with Industry Partner to 

evaluate advanced materials for 

their manufacturability. Factor 

results into component 

downselection decisions. 

Once baselined for flight, 

maintain government 

control/oversight/manufacturing 

of critical materials.

CONSEQUENCES

3

2

1

12345

L

I

H

O

O

D

1b 2,3

3

ES-15

Poor integrated cell 

performance due to 

potential incompatibility 

of the best selected 

cathodes, anodes, 

electrolytes, separators, 

and their associated 

unique manufacturing 

processes to function 

together as a complete 

lithium-ion cell design. 

Prelim assessment = 3 / 5; Individual 

development of advanced components for 

lithium-ion cells may fail to meet all of the 

enhanced performance metrics for humanrated batteries. Impact: Additional interactive 

investigations with added costs will need to 

be conducted to meet the compatibility 

issues and safety for human-rating.

Integrate candidate materials 

together in a laboratory to screen 

for compatibility and guide 

selection of best components.

Manufacture evaluation cells 

with different combinations of 

candidate component materials 

and conduct performance, safety 

and abuse testing to determine 

the best performing chemistries. 

1. EVA and Altair have detailed 

power lists, although still 

subject to change. LSS 

working on power profiles.

2. Materials now selected; 

scale-up not yet begun

3. Integration not yet begun.

2010

NASA/TM—2011-216963 30
Rank

WBS 

Trend

Description Likelihood, 

Consequence 

Mitigation

Risk Mgmt Approach

1

ES12

Non-Flow-Through 

stack development 

may not be 

successful.

If Non-Flow-Through 

stack development is not 

successful, mass/vol 

and reliability 

requirements won’t be 

met for Lander & LSS.

Non-flow-through stack being 

developed by experienced vendor 

personnel team (Gemini, Shuttle 

fuel cell experience); several 

leading fuel cell SBIR vendors 

developing back-up stacks.

2 N Fl Th h If N Fl Th h N fl th h b l f l t

5

4

3

L

I

K

E

Energy Storage Risk Assessment: Fuel Cells

Status of Risks as Reported at Last TCR

1 2

3 4

5

1 2

ES12

Non-Flow-Through

balance-of-plant 

development may 

not be successful.

If Non-Flow-Through

balance-of-plant 

development is not 

successful, mass/vol 

and reliability 

requirements won’t be 

met for Lander & LSS.

Non-flow-through balance-of-plant

being developed in-house at NASA 

by experienced fuel cell team; 

system integration and testing 

planned at each succeeding 

technology readiness level.

3 High-pressure 

electrolysis for RFC 

may not be 

successful.

If high-pressure 

electrolysis is not 

successful, lower 

pressure electrolysis will 

be required with 

mass/vol and parasitic 

power penalties.

Two parallel development 

approaches (IPP & SBIR) with 

leading high-pressure electrolysis 

vendors. Down-select to follow, 

leading to TRL

5 & 6.

1 2345

2

1

L

I

H

O

O

D

CONSEQUENCES 

2

1. Non-flow-through stacks built 

and tested, initial feasibility 

demonstrated 4 RFC integration of 

fuel cell and 

electrolysis 

technologies may 

not be successful.

If necessary integration 

hardware doesn’t work, 

RFC won’t be available 

for LSS.

Perform reactant management 

study/design, followed by hardware 

development, integration, and 

testing.

5

ES03

10,000 hr. life for 

primary fuel cells 

and RFCs may not 

be achievable.

If 10,000 hr. system life 

is not achievable, extra 

redundancy or 

premature system 

maintenance or 

replacement will be 

required.

Stress long life at component and 

subsystem levels; perform system 

life testing at TRL-5 for early 

awareness of issues; perform at 

TRL-6 in parallel with system 

qualification.

demonstrated.

2. NFT BOP built and tested, 

initial feasibility 

demonstrated.

3. Initial electrolysis work 

promising, but too early to 

reduce likelihood a level.

4. Same

5. Same

2010

Top 10 Battery 

Lower-Level Risks

NASA/TM—2011-216963 31
Top 10 Fuel Cell & RFC Lower-Level Risks

TRL Status

Technology

TRL at 

end of 

FY10

Needed to reach TRL 6 Comments

Technical Budget 

(ROM)

Schedule

(ROM)

Non-Flow-Through Fuel 

Cell S stem

4 $19M 3 Years

Cell System

High Pressure (2000 psi)

electrolyzer

2/3 $21M 5 Years

Regenerative Fuel Cell 

System

2

“High Energy” lithium-ion 

battery cell

2/3 Component 

development

$17M* 3-4 Years Operation at

0 °C limits 

performance

“Ultra High Energy” 2/3 Component $19M* 6 Years Cycle life and 

lithium-ion battery cell development operation at

0 °C limits 

performance

*Some synergy will allow for cost savings if both High Energy and Ultra-High Energy battery 

cells are pursued concurrently. These estimates assume a stand-alone task.

NASA/TM—2011-216963 32
Lessons Learned

1. It is better to try to develop technologies with aggressive goals, aggressive 

schedules, and no budget margin than not to try, even if the risks are very 

high.

• Although we have not met our technical goals for battery components, we made 

substantial progress and are now positioned to support nearer-term demos. 

• F th d l t i i d d ill ti t b hi h i k Further development is required, and will continue to be high risk.

2. Down-selecting technologies before TRL-4 is extremely risky – we got lucky 

on this one for fuel cells. 

• A serious technology development program supporting serious program schedules 

should not take this risk.

• It is a testament to the skill of our technical staff that this decision could 

be made without adequate data on the lower-TRL system.

3. Working closely with Cx and industry at the very beginning had us on a path 

to cross the “valley-of-death” for technology infusion.

• Priorities set by EVA, LSS and Altair were essential to keep the technology 

focused.

• Feedback provided by Saft, America ensured a sharper focus on manufacturability 

early on.

• Close collaboration with Infinity Hydrogen led to success.

Energy storage technologies were considered critically important for NASA’s Constellation Program.

Advanced batteries are critical

Reduces mass/volume and extends mission duration for EVA,

Extends range and/or functionality of robots/mobility systems,

Reduces mass or adds functionality for landers

Advanced fuel cells are critical for vehicle power

Summary 

Advanced fuel cells are critical for vehicle power

Recent advances make NASA-developed technology extremely attractive for reliability and system 

mass/volume

Provides water for life support

Advanced regenerative fuel cells are critical

Provides surface power during the lunar night

Substantial technical progress was made under the Energy Storage 

Project

Advancements made in Lithium Ion components

Li(NMC) cathodes show improved specific capacity at C/10

64

Li(NMC) cathodes show improved specific capacity at C/10,

Silicon-composite anodes show improved cycle life, 

Electrolytes show compatibility with high-voltage cathodes and 

improved self-extinguishing times,

Cathode coating shows improved thermal stability.

Advancements made in PEM fuel cells

“Non-flow-through” stack technology demonstrated to TRL-4

Flat-plate heat-pipes demonstrated to be effective for thermal 

management

NASA/TM—2011-216963 33
Energy Storage Project Final Report 

List of Acronyms

BOP Balance of Plant

C Charge/Discharge Rate

CDR Critical Design Review

Cx Constellation Program

DOD Depth of Discharge

ETDP Exploration Technology Development Program

EVA Extra Vehicular Activity

MEA Membrane Electrode Assembly

NFT Non-Flow Through

NMC Ni-Mn-Co 

NTR New Technology Report

PDR Preliminary Design Review

PEM Proton Exchange Membrane

EVA Extra Vehicular Activity PEMFC Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell

FC Fuel Cell

FT Flow Through

GEN Generation

GRC Glenn Research Center

HE High Energy

HX Heat Exchanger

IPP Innovative Partnership Program

IRC Irreversible Capacity

ISRU In-Situ Resource Utilization

JPL Joint Propulsion Laboratory

JSC Johnson Space Center

KSC Kennedy Space Center

LAT L A hit t T

PEMFC Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell

PI Principal Investigator

PLSS Portable Life Support System

PSU Power Supply Unit

RFC Regenerative Fuel Cell

R.T. Room Temperature

SBIR Small Business Innovative Research

SPR Small Pressurized Rover

TAMU Texas A&M University

TBD To Be Determined

TBR To Be Reviewed

TCR Technical Content Review

TPP Technology Prioritization Process

LAT Lunar Architecture Team

LS Lunar Surface

LSS Lunar Surface Systems

LT Launch Technology

TRL Technology Readiness Level

UHE Ultra-High Energy

URFC Unitized Regenerative Fuel Cell

NASA/TM—2011-216963 34
Energy Storage Project Bibliography

Project Summary 

C.R. Mercer, A.L. Jankovsky, C.M. Reid, T.B. Miller, M.A. Hoberecht, “Energy Storage 

Technology Development for Space Exploration,” AIAA Space 2010 Conference, Anaheim CA, 

AIAA–2010–813782, August (2010). 

Conference Presentations and Papers

Ayers, Katherine E. and Dalton, Luke T., “Developments in Passive Fuel Cell Performance for 

Lunar Missions,” Central Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, 

May 20–23, 2009. 

 

Baldwin, R.S., “Overview of the NASA Electrochemical Energy Storage Programs,” IAPG 

Chemical Working Group Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, July 10–11, 2008. 

 

R.S. Baldwin, “Overview of the NASA Electrochemical Energy Storage Programs,” IAPG 

Chemical Working Group Meeting, Williamsburg, VA, August 23–24, 2007. 

 

R.S. Baldwin, “Electrochemical Energy Storage and Power Sources for NASA Exploration 

Missions,” 10th Electrochemical Power Sources R&D Symposium, Williamsburg, VA, August 

20–23, 2007. 

 

Baldwin, Richard S., “Overview of the NASA Electrochemical Energy Storage Programs,” 

presented at the IAPG Chemical Working Group Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, June 15–16, 2006. 

 

Bennett, W.R., Baldwin, R.S., “Li-Ion Battery Demonstration for the 2007 NASA Desert 

Research and Technology Studies Program,” NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop, Huntsville 

AL, November 2007. 

 

Bennett, William R., “Incident Involving 30-Ah Li-ion Cell at NASA Glenn Research Center,” 

74th Lithium Battery Technical/Safety Group Meeting, Beaver Creek Marriott, Dayton, OH, 

September 6–7, 2006. 

 

D.J. Bents, V.J. Scullin, B.J. Chang, I.J. Jakupca, D.W. Johnson, C.P. Garcia, “Hydrogen 

Oxygen PEM Regenerative Fuel Cell Development at NASA Glenn Research Center,” 2006 

Fuel Cell Seminar, Honolulu, HI, November 13–17, 2006 (presented by K. Burke). 

 

Britton, D.L., Bennett, W.R., Miller, T.B., “Thermal Characterization of Lithium-ion Cells,” 

76th Lithium Battery Technical/Safety Group Meeting, September 5–6, 2007. 

 

Britton, D.L., Bennett, W.R., Miller, T.B., “Thermal Characterization Study of Lithium-ion Cells,” 

10th Electrochemical Power Sources R & D Symposium, Williamsburg, VA, August 20–23, 

2007. 

 

B.V. Ratnakumar, M.C. Smart, and W.C. West, “Advanced Li-Ion Batteries for NASA’s Lunar 

Missions,” International Battery Association (IBA) Meeting, Pacific Power Source Symposium 

2010, Waikoloa, Hawaii, January 11–15, 2010. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 35
B.V. Ratnakumar, M.C. Smart, and W.C. West, “Development of Materials for Advanced 

Lithium-ion Batteries for NASA’s Upcoming Lunar Missions,” Lithium Mobile Power 2009, 

November 12–13, 2009. 

 

Ratnakumar Bugga, Marshall Smart, and William West, “Development of Materials for 

Advanced Lithium-ion Batteries for NASA’s Future Missions,” Materials Science & Technology 

Meeting, October 2009, Pittsburg, PA. 

 

B.V. Ratnakumar, M.C. Smart, and W.C. West, “Development of Materials for Advanced 

Lithium-Ion Batteries for NASA’s Future Missions,” Materials Science and Technology 2009, 

Pittsburgh, PA, Oct. 25–29, 2009. 

 

Ratnakumar Bugga, Marshall C. Smart, William West and Jay Whitacre, “Development of 

Advanced Materials for High Energy Li-Ion Batteries,” Focused Battery Technology 

Workshop III: Material Challenges for High Energy Density and Long-Life Lithium-Ion Cells, 

February 18, 2008. 

 

Ratnakumar Bugga, Marshall C. Smart, William West and Jay Whitacre, “Development of 

Advanced Li-Ion Materials for Aerospace Applications,” 10th Electrochemical Power Sources 

R&D Symposium, Williamsburg, VA, Aug. 20–23, 2007. 

 

Burke, Kenneth A., Jakupca, Ian J., and Colozza, Anthony J, “Development of Passive Fuel Cell 

Thermal Management Materials,” 7th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference 

(IECEC 2009), Denver, Colorado, August 2–5, 2009. 

 

Burke, K.A., “Advanced Fuel Cell System Thermal Management for NASA Exploration 

Missions,” 6th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Cleveland, OH, 

July 28–30, 2008. 

 

Burke, Kenneth A., “Fuel Cell Research and Development at the NASA Glenn Research 

Center,” ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (11/09/05). 

Dai, Jinxiang, Skandan, Ganesh, Badway, Farid, Martin, Krista, and Meng, Shirley, “Ultrafine 

Mixed Metal Oxide Cathode Materials for Advanced Li-ion Batteries,” Central Regional Meeting 

of the American Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, May 20–23, 2009. 

Eldridge, C., Roy, R.J., Graf, J., Hoberecht, M., Kindler, A., Valdez, T.I., Kisor, A. and Narayan, 

S.R. “A High-Pressure Dual-Feed Water Electrolyzer for Extraterrestrial Energy Storage,” 

Central Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, May 20–23, 2009. 

 

Justin S. Golightly, Ashley Pietz, Jorge Bonilla, Lowell McCoy, and Mark J. Isaacson, “A Study 

on High Capacity Nanostructured Silicon Anodes,” 218th Electrochemical Society Meeting, Las 

Vegas, Nevada, Oct. 10–15, 2010. 

 

Justin S. Golightly, “Improved Batteries through Nanotechnology,” Renewable Energy 

Technology Conference & Exhibition, Washington, D.C., February 3–5, 2010. (poster) 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 36
Justin Golightly, Vince Teofilo, Ashley Pietz, Jorge Bonilla, Lowell McCoy, Jane Bonvallet, and 

Mark Isaacson, Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, “Nanostructured Composites for 

High Capacity Anodes,” NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop, November 2009, Huntsville AL. 

 

Nader M. Hagh, Mumu Moorthi, Ganesh Skandan, Shirley Meng, William C. West, Ratnakumar 

Bugga, Concha M. Reid, and Ganesan Nagasubramanian, “High Energy Density Cathode 

Materials for Li-ion Battery Applications,” 44th Power Sources Conference, June 2010, Las 

Vegas, NV. 

N.M. Hagh, M. Moorthi, G. Skandan, W. West, R. Bugga, S. Meng, “Structure-Property 

Relationship in Electrode Materials for Li-ion Battery Applications,” Session CC1: Solid-state 

Batteries, MRS Spring Meeting, April 6–8, 2010. 

N.M. Hagh, F. Badway, K. Martin, M. Moorthi, G. Skandan, “Microstructural Effects on 

Electrochemical Performance of Rechargeable Li-ion Battery Electrode Materials,” 27th Int’l 

Battery Seminar & Exhibit, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, March 15–18, 2010. 

Nader M. Hagh, Mumu Moorthi, and Ganesh Skandan, Shirley Meng, William C. West, 

Ratnakumar Bugga, and Concha Reid, “Advanced Nanostructured Cathode Materials for 

NASA’s Applications,” NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop, November 2009, Huntsville AL. 

M.A. Hoberecht, “NASA’s First Year Progress With Fuel Cell Advanced Development in Support 

of the Exploration Vision,” Space Technology & Applications International Forum 2007 (STAIF 

2007), Albuquerque, NM, February 11–15, 2007. 

 

M.A. Hoberecht, 2006 Fuel Cell Seminar “NASA PEM Fuel Cell Power Plant Development 

Program for Space Applications,” 2006 Fuel Cell Seminar, Honolulu, HI, November 13–17, 

2006. 

 

J. Jeevarajan and W. Tracinski, “Performance and Safety Tests of Li-ion Cells Arranged in a 

Matrix Design Configuration,” The 2010 Space Power Workshop, Manhattan Beach, CA. April, 

2010. 

 

J. Jeevarajan, “The Use of Nanomaterials to Achieve NASA’s Exploration Program Power 

Goals,” First International Symposium on NanoTechnology, Energy and Space Symposium, 

Houston, TX, October, 2009. 

 

J. Jeevarajan, “Power Goals for NASA’s Exploration Program,” 2009 AIAA Houston Chapter 

Symposium, Houston, TX, June 2009. 

 

J. Jeevarajan, “Power Systems Battery Projects,” Chrysler site-visit, June 2009. 

 

J. Jeevarajan, “Power Goals for NASA’s Exploration Program,” Presentation at UL’s Internal 

Awards Ceremony, Feb. 2009. 

 

J. Jeevarajan, “Improvements in Battery Technology for the Exploration Program,” Biennial 

Research and Technology Development Report: Johnson Space Center, Jan. 2008. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 37
F.C. Krause, M.C. Smart, G.K.S. Prakash, “The use of fluorinated electrolytes in lithium-ion 

batteries for improved safety in human-rated aerospace and terrestrial applications,” 

International Meeting on Lithium Batteries, Montreal, Canada, June 2010. 

Lang, C.M., Newman, A., Constantine, K. and Ma, J., “Improved Cathode Material Safety via a 

Metal Phosphate Coating,” NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop 2009, Nov. 2009. 

 

Lang, C.M. and Newman, A., “Metal Phosphate Coating for Improved Cathode Material Safety,” 

CERMACS 2009, May 2009. 

 

Jason Ma, Samad Firdosy, George Grüner, Jean-Pierre Fleurial, and S.R. Narayanan, 

“Platinum Alloy Catalysts by High Energy Ball-Milling,” Meet. Abstr. - Electrochem. Soc. 1002 

275 (2010). 

 

Alexandre Magasinski, Bogdan Zdyrko, Benjamin Hertzberg, Patrick Dixon, Frank Grant Jones, 

Thomas F. Fuller, Igor Luzinov and Gleb Yushin, “Nano-Silicon Anodes,” NASA Aerospace 

Battery Workshop, November 2009, Huntsville AL. 

Arumugam Manthiram, “High Energy Density Cathodes for Next Generation Lithium Ion 

Batteries,” NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop, November 2009, Huntsville AL. 

Manzo, Michelle A., “NASA Glenn Research Center Battery Activities Overview,” NESC Battery 

Working Group Meeting, Houston, Texas, June 30, 2009. 

Manthiram, Arumugam, “High Energy Density Cathodes for Next Generation Lithium Ion 

Batteries,” Central Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, 

May 20–23, 2009. 

Manzo, Michelle A., “Battery and Fuel Cell Development for NASA’s Constellation Missions,” 

21st Space Photovoltaic Research and Technology Conference (SPRAT XXI), Cleveland, Ohio, 

October 6–8, 2009. 

 

Manzo, Michelle A., “Battery and Fuel Cell Development for NASA’s Exploration Missions,” 

U. S. Air Trade and Technology Expo., Dayton, Ohio, July 16, 2009. 

 

Manzo, Michelle A. and Reid, Concha M., “Battery and Fuel Cell Development for NASA’s 

Exploration Missions,” 11th Electrochemical Power Sources R&D Symposium, Baltimore, 

Maryland, July 13–16, 2009. 

 

Manzo, Michelle and Narayan, S.R., “Energy Storage and Energy Conversion 

Space Power Session: Introductory Remarks,” Central Regional Meeting of the American 

Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, May 20–23, 2009. 

 

Manzo, M.A., Hoberecht, M.A., Reid, C.M., Miller, T.B.; Mercer, C.R., “Fuel Cell and Battery 

Development for Lunar Exploration Power Systems,” Space Technology and Applications 

International Forum Technologies for Lunar Surface Power Systems, February 2008. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 38
M.A. Manzo, T.B. Miller, M.A Hoberecht, E.D. Baumann, “Energy Storage: Batteries and Fuel 

Cells,” American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) 45th Aerospace Sciences 

Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 8–11, 2007. 

 

Manzo, Michelle A., “Fuel Cell Research and Development for Future NASA Missions,” Space 

Power Workshop, April 24–27, 2006. 

 

McKissock, B., Manzo, M.A., Miller, T.B. Reid, C.M., Bennett, W.R., Gemeiner, R. “Progress of 

Ongoing NASA Lithium-Ion Cell Verification Testing for Aerospace Applications,” NASA/TM—

2008-215154, May 2008. 

 

McKissock, Barbara I., Reid, Concha M., Manzo, Michelle A., Miller, Thomas B., Britton, Doris 

L., and Bennett, William R., “Lithium-Ion Verification for Aerospace Applications,” 2nd 

International Large Lithium Ion Battery Technology and Applications Symposium, Baltimore, 

MD, May 2006. 

 

C.R. Mercer, A.L. Jankovsky, C.M. Reid, T.B. Miller, M.A. Hoberecht, “Energy Storage 

Technology Development for Space Exploration,” AIAA Space 2010 Conference, Anaheim CA, 

AIAA–2010–813782, August (2010). 

 

C.R. Mercer, “Energy Storage Technology Development for Space Exploration,” presentation at 

the Space Power Workshop, Huntington Beach CA, April (2010). 

 

C.R. Mercer, “Battery and Fuel Cell Development Goals for the Lunar Surface and Lander,” 

presentation at the Space Power Workshop, Huntington Beach CA, April (2008). 

T.B. Miller, “Status of the Space Rated Lithium Ion Battery Advanced Development Project in 

Support of the Exploration Vision,” Space Technology & Applications International Forum 2007 

(STAIF 2007), Albuquerque, NM, February 11–15, 2007. 

 

Sri R. Narayan, Andrew Kindler, Adam Kisor, Thomas Valdez, Robert Roy, Christopher 

Eldridge, Bryan Murach, and Mark Hoberecht, “Dual-Feed Balanced High-Pressure Electrolysis 

of Water in Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Stack,” Meet. Abstr. - Electrochem. Soc. 1002 273 

(2010). 

 

Sekharipuram Narayanan, Thomas Valdez, and Samad Firdosy, “Analysis of the Performance 

of Nafion-Based Membrane Electrode Assemblies for Hydrogen-Oxygen Fuel Cells,” Meet. 

Abstr. - Electrochem. Soc. 702 196 (2007). 

 

S.R. Narayanan, T.I. Valdez, and S.A. Firdosy, “High Performance Membrane Electrode 

Assemblies for Primary and Regenerative Fuel Cells,” Space Technology Applications 

International Forum (STAIF) 2007, February 12–16, Albuquerque, (2007). 

 

J. Neubauer, N. Simmons, A. Bennetti, C. Pearson, C.M. Reid, “The Effect of Variable End-ofCharge Battery Management on Small-Cell Batteries,” 5th International Energy Conversion 

Engineering Conference (IECEC), St. Louis, MO, June 25–27, 2007. 

 

J. Neubauer, N. Simmons, A. Bennetti, C. Pearson, C.M. Reid, M.A. Manzo, “The Effect of 

Variable End-of-Charge Battery Management on Small-Cell Batteries,” Space Power Workshop, 

Los Angeles, CA, April 24–26, 2007. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 39
Pien, Michael, Warshay, Marvin, Lis, Steven, Jalan, Radha, “Advanced Nanocomposite 

Membranes for High Pressures PEM Electrolyzers,” Central Regional Meeting of the American 

Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, May 20–23, 2009. 

 

Boris Ravdel and Brett L. Lucht, “Development of Non-Flammable Electrolytes for Lithium Ion 

Batteries,” NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop, November 2009, Huntsville AL. 

 

Ravdel, Boris and Lucht, Brett L., “Physical Properties, Thermal Stability and Flammability of the 

Electrolyte Solutions for Lithium-Ion Batteries,” Central Regional Meeting of the American 

Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, May 20–23, 2009. 

 

Jon S. Read, J. Jeevarajan, Pranav Patel, Joe Bytella and Symmetry Resources, 

Inc., “Performance and Safety Testing of Panasonic 2.9 Ah Li-ion NCR 18650 Cells,” The 2009 

NASA Battery Workshop, Huntsville, AL, November, 2009. 

 

Reid, Concha M., “Advanced Materials and Cell Components for NASA’s Exploration Missions,” 

NASA Battery Workshop, November 2009, Huntsville AL. 

 

Reid, Concha M., “Overview of the NASA GRC Electrochemical Power and Energy Storage 

Technology Programs (Presented by Dr. Richard Baldwin),” Interagency Advanced Power 

Group (IAPG) – Chemical Working Group Meeting, Baltimore, Maryland, July 16–17, 2009. 

 

Reid, Concha M., “A Study on Advanced Lithium-Based Battery Cell Chemistries to Enhance 

Lunar Exploration Missions,” 11th Electrochemical Power Sources R&D Symposium, Baltimore, 

Maryland, July 13–16, 2009. 

 

Reid, Concha M., Miller, Thomas B., Michelle A. Manzo, and Carolyn R. Mercer, “Advanced 

Lithium-Ion Cell Development for NASA’s Constellation Missions,” NASA Aerospace Battery 

Workshop, November 18–20, 2008. 

 

Reid, Concha, “Lithium Iron Phosphate Cell Performance Evaluations for Lunar Extravehicular 

Activities,” 76th Lithium Battery Technical Safety Group Meeting, Cleveland, OH, September 5–

6, 2007. 

 

Reid, C.M. “Lithium Iron Phosphate Cell Performance Evaluations for Lunar Extravehicular 

Activities,” 10th Electrochemical Power Sources R&D Symposium, Williamsburg, VA, August 

20–23, 2007. 

 

C.M. Reid, M.A. Manzo, T.B. Miller, B.I. McKissock, W.R. Bennett, “An Update on the LithiumIon Cell Low-Earth-Orbit Verification Test Program,” NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop, 

Huntsville, AL, November 14–16, 2006. 

 

Reid, Concha M., Manzo, Michelle A., Miller, Thomas, B., Smart, Marshall C., Bugga, 

Ratnakumar V., and Gitzendanner, Rob, “Performance and Comparison of Lithium-Ion Batteries 

Under Low-Earth-Orbit Mission Profiles,” 4th International Energy Conversion Engineering 

Conference (IECEC), San Diego, California, June 26–29, 2006. - ESMD – ETDP 

 

M.C. Smart, F.C. Krause, W.C. West, J. Soler, G.K.S. Prakash, and B.V. Ratnakumar, 

“Development of Li-Ion battery electrolytes with improved safety for NASA applications,” 217th 

Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, Vancouver, Canada, April 25–30, 2010. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 40
M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, F.C. Krouse, W.C. West, and L.W. Whitcanack, “The 

Development of Li-Ion Electrolytes With Improved Operating Temperature Range and Safety 

Characteristics,” 2010 Space Power Workshop, Manhattan Beach, CA, April 22, 2010. 

 

M.C. Smart, F.C. Krause, K.A. Smith, W.C. West, J. Soler, G.K.S. Prakash, and B.V. 

Ratnakumar, “Electrochemical Characterization of LiNixCo1-xO2 and Li(Li0.17Ni0.25Mn0.58)O2–

based Li-Ion cells Containing Electrolytes with Reduced Flammability,” International Battery 

Association (IBA) Meeting, Pacific Power Source Symposium 2010, Waikoloa, Hawaii, 

January 11–15, 2010. 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, L.D. Whitcanack, K. A. Smith, S. Santee, F.J. Puglia, and R. 

Gitzendanner, “Performance Demonstration of MCMB-LiNixCo1-xO2 Cells Containing Electrolytes 

Designed for Wide Operating Temperature Range,” 216th Meeting of the Electrochemical 

Society, Vienna, Austria, Oct. 5, 2009. 

 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, A.S. Gozdz, and S. Mani, “The Effect of Electrolyte Additives 

upon the Lithium Kinetics of Li-Ion Cells Containing MCMB and LiNixCo1-xO2 Electrodes and 

Exposed to High Temperatures,” 216th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, Vienna, Austria, 

Oct. 5, 2009. 

 

M.C. Smart, K.A. Smith, P. Bhalla, J. Hu, G.K.S. Prakash, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “The Use of 

Fluorinated Compounds in Li-ion Battery Electrolytes,” 19th International Symposium on 

Fluorine Chemistry, August 23–28, 2009. 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, L.D. Whitcanack, F.J. Puglia , S. Santee , and R. Gitzendanner, 

“Performance Testing of Yardney Li-Ion Cells and Batteries in Support of Future NASA 

Missions,” 8th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC), Colorado 

Convention Center, Denver, CO, Aug. 3–5, 2009. 

 

M.C. Smart, B.L. Lucht, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “The Use of Electrolyte Additives to Improve the 

High Temperature Resilience of Li-Ion Cells,” ECS Trans. 11, (29) 79 (2008). 

 

M.C. Smart, and B.V. Ratnakumar, L.D. Whitcanack, K.A. Smith, S. Santee, R. Gitzendanner, 

V. Yevoli, “Li-Ion Electrolytes Containing Ester Co-Solvents for Wide Operating Temperature 

Range,” ECS Trans. 11, (29) 99 (2008). 

 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, K.A. Smith, and L.D. Whitcanack, “Electrolytes for Wide 

Operating Temperature Range Li-ion Cells,” Lithium Mobile Power Conference, Las Vegas, 

Nevada, Dec. 8, 2008. 

 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, A.S. Gozdz, and S. Mani, “Improved Low Temperature 

Performance of High Rate Nano-Lithium Iron Phosphate-Based Li-Ion Cells with Advanced 

Electrolytes,” 214th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, Honolulu, HI, Oct. 12–17, 2008. 

 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, and L.D. Whitcanack, “Assessment of Various Low Temperature 

Electrolytes in Prototype Li-ion Cells Developed for ESMD Applications,” 6th International 

Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC), Cleveland, OH, July 28–30, 2008. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 41
M.C. Smart, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “Life Characteristics of Li-ion Batteries for Aerospace 

Applications,” 8th International Advanced Automotive Battery and Ultracapacitor Conference 

and Symposia, Tampa Convention Center, Tampa, Florida, May 12–16, 2008. 

 

M.C. Smart, B.L. Lucht, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “The Use of Electrolyte Additives to Improve the 

High Temperature Resilience of Li-Ion Cells,” 212th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, 

Washington, DC, October 7–12, 2007. 

 

M.C. Smart, and B.V. Ratnakumar, L.D. Whitcanack, K.A. Smith, S. Santee, R. Gitzendanner, 

V. Yevoli, “Li-Ion Electrolytes Containing Ester Co-Solvents for Wide Operating Temperature 

Range,” 212th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, Washington, DC, October 7–12, 2007. 

 

Marshall C. Smart, Ratnakumar Bugga, and Larry D. Whitcanack, “Overview of Li-ion Cell and 

Battery Testing at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory,” 10th Electrochemical Power Sources R&D 

Symposium, Williamsburg, VA, Aug. 20–23, 2007. 

 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, and L.D. Whitcanack, “Performance of Low Temperature 

Electrolytes in Experimental and Prototype Li-ion Cells,” 5th International Energy Conversion 

Engineering Conference (IECEC), St. Louis, MI, June 27–29, 2007. 

 

M.C. Smart, K.A. Smith, P. Bhalla, J. Hu, G.K.S. Prakash, J.F. Whitacre, and B.V. Ratnakumar, 

“The Development of Improved Lithium-ion Battery Electrolytes Containing Fluorinated CoSolvents,” 233rd National Meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS), Chicago, Illinois, 

March 28, 2007. 

 

M.C. Smart, S. Surampudi, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “Low Temperature Li-Ion Batteries for Mars 

Missions,” Reliability of Advanced Electronic Packages and Devices in Extreme Cold 

Environments, Arcadia, CA, Feb 27-March 1, 2007. 

 

Marshall C. Smart, Larry Whitcanack and Ratnakumar Bugga, “Low Temperature Li-ion 

Batteries for Planetary Missions,” Space Technology and Applications International Forum 

(STAIF), Albuquerque, NM (February 14, 2007). 

 

Marshall Smart, Jay Whitacre, William West, A. Manthiram, G.K.S. Prakash, and Ratnakumar 

Bugga, “Lithium-ion Batteries for Space Applications,” Space Power Workshop, Los Angeles, 

CA, April 23–26, 2007. 

 

M.C. Smart, J.F, Whitacre, W.C. West, and Ratnakumar Bugga, “Lithium Ion Batteries for Space 

Applications,” IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana March 3–10, 2007. 

 

Marshall Smart, Jay Whitacre, William West, A. Manthiram, G.K.S. Prakash, and Ratnakumar 

Bugga, “Li-Ion Batteries for Space Applications: High Specific Energy and Wide-operating 

Temperature,” Lithium Mobile Power 2006, Miami Beach, FL, December 4–6, 2006. 

 

M.C. Smart, K.B. Chin, L.D. Whitcanack, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “Storage Characteristics of 

Li-ion Batteries,” NASA Battery Workshop, Huntsville, AL, November 14–16, 2006. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 42
M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, and K. Amine, “Electrochemical performance and kinetics of 

LiCo0.33Ni0.33Mn0.33O2 electrodes in low temperature electrolytes,” IBC-HBA 2006, Waikoloa, 

Hawaii, 9–12 January 2006. 

 

Kiah A. Smith, Marshall C. Smart, G.K. Surya Prakash, and V.B. Ratnakumar, “Lithium-Ion 

Electrolytes Containing Flame-Retardant Additives for Increased Safety Characteristics,” ECS 

Trans. 16(35) 33 (2009). 

K.A. Smith, M.C. Smart, W.C. West, J. Soler, F.C. Krause, G.K.S. Prakash, B.V. Ratnakumar, L. 

Yang, and B.L. Lucht, “Evaluation of Electrolytes Containing Flame Retardant Additives in 

LiNixCo1-xO2 and Li(Li0.17Ni0.25Mn0.58)O2-Based Li-ion Cells,” 216th Meeting of the 

Electrochemical Society, Vienna, Austria, Oct. 5, 2009. 

K.A. Smith, M.C. Smart, G.K.S Prakash, B.V. Ratnakumar, “Electrolytes Containing Fluorinated 

Ester Co-solvents for Low-Temperature Li-Ion Cells,” ECS Trans. 11, (29) 91 (2008). 

K.A. Smith, M.C. Smart, G.K.S Prakash, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “Lithium-Ion Cells with 

Phosphorus Flame-Retardant Additives for Improved Safety Characteristics,” 214th Meeting of 

the Electrochemical Society, Honolulu, HI, Oct. 12–17, 2008. 

K.A. Smith, M.C. Smart, G.K.S Prakash, B.V. Ratnakumar, Electrolytes Containing Fluorinated 

Ester Co-solvents for Low-Temperature Li-Ion Cells, 212th Meeting of the Electrochemical 

Society, Washington, DC, October 7–12, 2007. 

 

Smith, William A., “Advanced Product Water Removal (APWR), Fuel Cells for Space Future 

Missions,” Central Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, 

May 20–23, 2009. 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Keith J. Billings, Florian Mansfeld, and S.R. Narayanan, “Iridium and Lead 

Doped Ruthenium Oxide Catalysts for Oxygen Evolution,” Meet. Abstr. - Electrochem. Soc. 902 

1044 (2009). 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Adam Kisor, Phillip R. Wilson, Jack C. Morrison, Julie A. Townsend, Curtis L. 

Collins, David S. Mittman, Jaret B. Matthews, Brian H. Wilcox, and S.R. Narayanan, “Hybrid 

Fuel Cell/High-Power Battery Power Source for the All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial 

Explorer (ATHLETE) Robot,” Presented at 2009 Space Power Workshop, Manhattan Beach, 

California, (2009). 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Keith Billings, Samad A. Firdosy, Florian Mansfeld, and S.R. Naraynanan, 

“Studies on Iridium-Doped Ruthenium Oxide Catalyst for Oxygen Evolution in Proton Exchange 

Membrane (PEM) Electrolyzers,” Meet. Abstr. - Electrochem. Soc. 802 415 (2008). 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Keith Billings, SR Narayanan, and Samad Firdosy, “High-Performance 

Nafion-based Membrane Electrode Assemblies for Hydrogen/Oxygen Fuel Cells,” Meet. Abstr. - 

Electrochem. Soc. 802 970 (2008). 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Jeff Sakamoto, Keith Billings, Samad A. Firdosy, F. Mansfeld, and S.R. 

Narayanan, “Studies on Ruthenium Oxide Catalyst for Oxygen Evolution in Proton Exchange 

Membrane (PEM) Electrolyzers,” Meet. Abstr. - Electrochem. Soc. 801 360 (2008). 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 43
A. Vasquez, “Integrated Reactant Regulator, Ejector Pump, and Two-Stage Water Separator for 

Fuel Cells,” 6th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Cleveland, OH, July 

28–30, 2008, AIAA–2008–5741–682. 

 

W.C. West, J. Soler, M. Smart, and B. V. Ratnakumar, “Li2MnO3-LiMO2 (M=Mn, Co, Ni) Solid 

Solutions With Surface Coatings to Improve Li-ion Cathode Performance,” Materials Science & 

Technology Meeting, October 2010, Houston TX. 

 

W. West, M. Smart, J. Soler and R. Bugga, “Materials for Improving the Specific Energy and 

Safety of Lithium-Ion Cells,” The 15th International Meeting on Lithium Batteries (IMLB 2010), 

July 2010, Montreal, Canada. 

 

W.C. West, M.C. Smart, and Ratnakumar V. Bugga, Materials for Improving the Specific energy 

and Safety of Lithium-ion Cells, International Meeting on Lithium Batteries, Montreal, Canada, 

June 2010. 

 

W.C. West, M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, G. Skandan, and N. Hagh, “Characterization Studies 

of Li2MnO3-LiMO2 (M=Mn, Co, Ni) Cathodes,” NASA Battery Workshop, November 2009, 

Huntsville AL. 

 

W.C. West, M.C. Smart, E. Wong and R.V. Bugga, “Characterization Studies of Li(Li(1/3-

2x/3)Mn(2/3-x/3)Nix)O2 Cathodes,” Electrochemical Society Meeting, October 2007, Washington, 

DC. 

 

NASA Published: 

 

Baldwin, Richard S., Bennett, W.R., Lewton, M.R., Harris, M.K., “Battery Separator 

Characterization and Evaluation Procedures for NASA’S Advanced Lithium-Ion Batteries,” 

NASA/TM—2010-216099, May 2010. 

 

Baldwin, Richard S., “A Review of State-of-the-Art Separator Materials for Advanced LithiumBased Batteries for Future Aerospace Missions,” NASA/TM—2009-215590, March 2009. 

 

Bents, David J., “Lunar Regenerative Fuel Cell (RFC) Reliability Testing for Assured Mission 

Success,” SAE 2009 Power Systems Conference, Washington, DC, November 11–13, 2008, 

NASA/TM—2009-215502, February 2009. 

 

D.L. Britton, “Evaluation and Testing of Commercially-Available Carbon Nanotubes as Negative 

Electrodes for Li-ion Cells,” NASA/TM—2007-214809, May 2007. 

Burke, Kenneth A., Jakupca, Ian J., and Colozza, Anthony J., “Development of Passive Fuel 

Cell Thermal Management Materials,” 7th International Energy Conversion Engineering 

Conference (IECEC 2009), Denver, Colorado, August 2–5, 2009. 

 

Burke, Kenneth A., “Advanced Fuel Cell System Thermal Management for NASA Exploration 

Missions,” NASA/TM—2009-215426, June 2009. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 44
Burke, K.A., “Advanced Fuel Cell System Thermal Management for NASA Exploration 

Missions,” 6th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Cleveland, OH, July 

28–30, 2008. 

 

K.A. Burke, “Small Portable PEM Fuel Cell Systems for NASA,” Prepared for the Third 

International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference sponsored by the American Institute 

of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Francisco, California, August 15–18, 2005 (AIAA–2005–

5680) NASA/TM—2005-5680 December 2005, ESMD – ETDP 

 

Colozza, A., Burke, K.A., “Fuel Cell Thermal Management Through Conductive Cooling Plates,” 

NASA/TM—2008-215149, May 2008. 

 

Colozza, A., Burke, K.A., “Evaluation of a Passive Heat Exchanger Based Cooling System for 

Fuel Cell Applications,” NASA TM number to be assigned (2010). 

 

Green, Robert D., McKissock, Barbara, Bennett, William, “Report on Lithium Ion Battery Trade 

Studies to Support the ETDP Energy Storage Project,” NASA/TM—2010-216923, expected 

publication date: October 2010. 

 

Hoberecht, M.A., “NASA’s PEM Fuel Cell Power Plant Development Program for Space 

Applications,” NASA/TM—2008-214991, Jan 2008. 

 

Hoberecht, M.A., “A Comparison of Flow-Through versus Non-Flow-Through Proton Exchange 

Membrane Fuel Cell Systems for NASA'S Exploration Missions,” NASA TM 216107. 

 

Hoberecht, M.A., “NASA’S Planned Fuel Cell Development Activities for 2009 and Beyond in 

Support of the Exploration Vision,” NASA TM 216106. 

 

J. Jeevarajan, “Advanced Battery Technology Programs,” Biennial Research and Technology 

Development Report: Johnson Space Center, Jan 2010. 

 

M.A. Manzo, T.B. Miller, M.A Hoberecht, E.D. Baumann, “Energy Storage: Batteries and Fuel 

Cells,” American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) 45th Aerospace Sciences 

Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 8–11, 2007. NASA/TM—2007-214837. 

 

McKissock, Barbara I., Manzo, Michelle A., Miller, Thomas B., Reid, Concha M., Bennett, 

William R. and Gemeiner, Russel, “Preliminary Results of NASA Lithium-Ion Cell Verification 

Testing for Aerospace Applications,” NASA/TM—2005-213995, November, 2005, ESMD – 

ETDP. 

 

Mercer, Carolyn R., Jankovsky, Amy L., Reid, Concha M., Miller, Tom B., Hoberecht, Mark A., 

“Energy Storage Project Final Report,” NASA/TM number to be assigned (2010). 

 

Neubauer, Jeremy, S.; Bennetti, Andrea; Pearson, Chris; Simmons, Nick; Reid, Concha; 

Manzo, Michelle, “The Effect of Variable End of Charge Battery Management on Small-Cell 

Batteries,” NASA/TM—2007-215044; AIAA–2007–4789, December 2007. 

 

Reid, Concha M., and Bennett, William R., “A Study on Advanced Lithium-Based Battery Cell 

Chemistries to Enhance Lunar Exploration Missions,” NASA/TM—2010-216791, August 2010. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 45
Reid, C.M.; Manzo, M.A., Button, R.M.; and Gemeiner, R., “Charge-Control Unit for Testing 

Lithium-Ion Cells,” NASA Tech Briefs magazine, June 1, 2008. 

 

Reid, C.M.; Smart, M.C.; Bugga, R.V.; Manzo, M.A.; Miller, T.B.; Gitzendanner, R., 

“Performance and Comparison of Lithium-Ion Batteries Under Low-Earth-Orbit Mission Profiles,” 

NASA/TM—2007-214826 Dec 2007. 

 

Reid, Concha M., “Low Temperature Low-Earth-Orbit Testing of Mars Surveyor Program Lander 

Lithium-Ion Battery,” NASA/TM—2005-213967, November 2005. 

 

Reid, Concha M., “Progress in Materials and Component Development for Advanced Lithiumion Cells for NASA’s Exploration Missions,” NASA/TM number to be assigned (2010). 

 

Scheidegger, Brianne, “Performance Characterization of High Energy Commercial Lithium-ion 

Cells,” NASA/TM number to be assigned (2010). 

 

Journal Articles 

W. Li, A. Xiao, B.L. Lucht, M.C. Smart, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “Surface analysis of MCMB and 

LiNixCo1-xO2 electrodes from cells containing electrolytes with stabilizing additives and exposed 

to high temperature,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 155 (9), A648-A657 (2008). 

 

S.R. Narayanan, Thomas I. Valdez, and Samad Firdosy, Analysis of the Performance of NafionBased Hydrogen–Oxygen Fuel Cells, J. Electrochem. Soc. 156 B152 (2009). 

 

W.C. West, J. Soler, M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, S. Firdosy, V. Ravi, M. Anderson, A. 

Manthiram, “Mitigating Impedance Growth of Layered Solid Solution Li2MnO3-LiMO2 (M= Ni, Mn, 

Co) Li-Ion Cathodes with Alumina Coatings,” manuscript in preparation, (2010). 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Keith J. Billings, Jeff Sakamoto, Florian Mansfeld, and S.R. Narayanan, 

“Iridium and Lead Doped Ruthenium Oxide Catalysts for Oxygen Evolution,” ECS Trans. 25 (1), 

1371 (2009). 

 

Jay Whitacre, Rachid Yazami, André Hamwi, Marshall C. Smart, William Bennett, G.K. Surya 

Prakash, Thomas Miller and Ratnakumar Bugga, Low operational temperature Li–CFx batteries 

using cathodes containing sub-fluorinated graphitic materials, Journal of Power Sources, 

Volume 160, Issue 1, 29 September 2006, Pages 577–584 (Journal Article) ESMD – ETDP. 

 

M.C. Smart, B.L. Lucht, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “Electrochemical characteristics of MCMB and 

LiNixCo1-xO2 electrodes from cells containing electrolytes with stabilizing additives and exposed 

to high temperature,” J. Electrochemical Soc., 155 (8), A557-A568 (2008). 

 

M.C, Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, and K. Amine, “Electrochemical performance and kinetics of 

LiCo0.33Ni0.33Mn0.33O2 electrodes in low temperature electrolytes,” J. Power Sources, 168 (2), 

501–508 (2007). 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, A. Behar, L.D. Whitcanack, J.-S. Yu, M. Alamgir, “Gel Polymer 

Electrolyte Lithium-Ion Cells with Improved Low Temperature Performance,” J. Power Sources, 

165 (2), 535–543 (2007). 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 46
R&T Reports 

 

Bennett, W.R.; Baldwin, R.S., “Lithium-Ion Battery Demonstrated for NASA Desert Research 

and Technology Studies,” in Research and Technology 2007, NASA/TM—2008-215054, Glenn 

Research Center, June 2008, pp. 35–36. 

 

Britton, Doris L. and Miller, Thomas B., “Thermal Stability of Lithium-Ion Cells Studied,” in 

Research and Technology 2006, NASA/TM—2007-214479, Glenn Research Center, July 2007, 

pp. 101–102. 

 

Burke, K.A.; Colozza, A.J., “Passive Cooling Plates Studied for Fuel Cells,” in Research and 

Technology 2007, NASA/TM—2008-215054, Glenn Research Center, June 2008, pp. 36–37. 

 

Burke, K.A., “Passive Water Separator Developed for Fuel Cells,” LEW-18304-1, in Research 

and Technology 2007, NASA/TM—2008-215054, Glenn Research Center, June 2008, pp. 37–

38. 

 

Prokopius, Kevin P., Hoberecht, Mark A. Loyselle, Patricia L., “NASA’s Proton Exchange 

Membrane Fuel Cell Engineering Model Fuel Cell Powerplant Evaluated,” in Research and 

Technology 2006, NASA/TM—2007-214479, Glenn Research Center, July 2007, pp. 104–106. 

 

Reid, C.M.; Miller, T.B., “Lithium-Based Battery Performance Evaluated for NASA’s Exploration 

Missions,” in Research and Technology 2007, NASA/TM—2008-215054, Glenn Research 

Center, June 2008, pp. 39–41. 

 

Reid, Concha M., “Lithium-Ion Cells From Multiple Vendors Demonstrated 10,000 Low-EarthOrbit Cycles at Various Conditions,” in Research and Technology 2006, NASA/TM—2007-

214479, Glenn Research Center, July 2007, pp. 106–108. 

 

Reid, Concha M., “Life Cycle Testing of Mars Surveyor Program Lander Lithium-Ion Battery 

achieved over 10,000 Low-Earth-Orbit Cycles,” in Research and Technology 2005, NASA/TM—

2006-214016, Glenn Research Center, May 2006, pp. 61–62. 

 

Arturo Vasquez, “Advanced Fuel Cells for Space Exploration Applications,” 2009 Biennial 

Research Report, Johnson Space Center. 

 

Arturo Vasquez, “Advanced Ejector and Water Separator Development for Human Spaceflight 

Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Applications,” 2007 Biennial Research Report, Johnson 

Space Center. 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 47
New Technology Reports 

MSC-24157-1, New Technology Report for: “Large-Flow-Area Flow-Selective Liquid/Gas 

Separator,” Tech Brief Article (to be published) 

MSC-24169-1, New Technology Report for: “Self-Regulating Control of Parasitic Electric Loads 

in Fuel Cell Power Systems,” Tech Brief Article produced and published. Patent applied for and 

pending. 

MSC-24592-1, New Technology Report for: “Fuel Cell/Electrochemical Cell Voltage Monitor 

With Isolated Communication and Direct In-Stack Power Connections”. 

MSC-24731-1, New Technology Report for: “Pressure Regulator with Internal Ejector Circulation 

Pump, Flow and Pressure Measurement Porting, and Fuel Cell System Integration Options,” 

Tech Brief Article Produced, but not published yet. 

 

Keith Billings, “Catalyst Spray Technique for Fabrication of Membrane Electrode Assemblies 

(MEAs) for Fuel Cells and Alcohol Electrolysis Cells,” NTR-NPO 47188. 

 

M.C. Smart, R.V. Bugga, F.C. Krouse, and G.K.S. Prakash, “Optimized Li-ion electrolytes 

containing triphenyl phosphate as a flame retardant additive,” NTR NPO-47465, (Dec 22, 2009). 

 

M.C. Smart, K.A. Smith, B.V. Ratnakumar, and G.K.S. Prakash, “Li-ion electrolytes containing 

phosphorus-based flame retardant additives,” NTR NPO-46599, (Sept 22, 2008). 

 

M.C. Smart, R.V. Bugga, A.S. Gozdz, S. Mani, “Electrolytes designed for improved operation of 

Li-ion cells at high temperatures,” NTR NPO-46527, (Sept 5, 2008). 

 

M.C. Smart, R.V. Bugga, A.S. Gozdz, S. Mani, “Improved Low Temperature Performance of 

High Rate Nano-Lithium Iron Phosphate-Based Li-Ion Cells with the use of Advanced 

Electrolytes,” NTR NPO-46180, (May 2, 2008). 

 

M.C. Smart, K.A. Smith, B.V. Ratnakumar, and G.K.S. Prakash, “Optimized Li-ion electrolytes 

containing fluorinated esters co-solvents with improved performance and safety characteristics, 

NTR NPO-45824, (Jan. 2, 2008). 

 

M.C. Smart, B.L. Lucht, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “The use of electrolyte additives to improve the 

high temperature resilience of Li-ion cells,” NTR NPO-44805 (January 16, 2007). 

 

M.C. Smart, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “Optimized carbonate and ester-based Li-ion electrolytes 

with improved low temperature performance of Li-ion cells,” NTR NPO-44974 (March 13, 2007). 

 

M.C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, G.K.S. Prakash, K. Smith, and P. Bhalla, “Lithium-ion electrolyte 

containing fluoroester co-solvents with improved performance and safety characteristics,” NTR 

NPO-44626 (November 8, 2006). 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Keith Billing, Adam Kisor, S.R. Narayan, “Decal Transfer Method for 

Membrane Electrode Assemble Fabrication,” NTR-NPO 47005, (In Progress) 

 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 48
Thomas I. Valdez, Keith Billing, S.R. Narayan, “Lead-doped Ruthenium Oxide Catalyst for 

Oxygen Evolution,” NTR-NPO 46975, (In Progress) 

 

Thomas I. Valdez, Keith Billing, S.R. Narayan, “Iridium-doped Ruthenium Oxide Catalyst for 

Oxygen Evolution,” NTR-NPO 46387, (In Progress) 

 

W.C. West, M.C. Smart, and B.V. Ratnakumar, “A Novel Li-Ion Battery Electrolyte Candidate: 

Lithium Hexafluoroisopropoxide,” NTR NPO-47614, (2010). 

 

 

NASA Contractor Reports 

Prokopius, K., Colozza, A., “High Pressure Electrolyzer System Evaluation,” NASA CR 216110. 

 

Patents and Patent Applications 

 

“An Improved Electrochemical Cell,” Infinity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, Inc. US Patent Application 

Serial Number 12/533258. Patent Application Number PCT/US2010/043715 

MSC-24169-1, New Technology Report for: “Self-Regulating Control of Parasitic Electric Loads 

in Fuel Cell Power Systems”. Tech Brief Article produced and published. Patent applied for 

and pending. 

 

Robert C. McDonald, Katherine E. Harrison, Shelly L. Van Blarcom, Shannon O’Toole and 

Michael P. Moeller, “Thermal switch material suitable for use in controlling short circuits in 

lithium-ion batteries and method of making the thermal switch material,” Patent Application 

Serial Number 12/653,655. 

 

M.C. Smart, K.A. Smith, Ratnakumar V. Bugga, G.K.S. Prakash, and F.C. Krause, “Lithium-Ion 

Electrolytes Containing Flame Retardant Additives For Increased Safety Characteristics,” U.S. 

Patent Application Serial No. 12/543,495 (Aug. 19, 2009). 

 

M.C. Smart, and Ratnakumar V. Bugga, “Lithium Ion Electrolytes and Lithium Ion Cells with 

Good Low Temperature Performance,” United States Patent Application 20090253046 (Filed 

April 7, 2009). 

 

M.C. Smart, Ratnakumar V. Bugga, G.K.S. Prakash, K.A. Smith, P. Bhalla, “Lithium-ion 

Electrolytes with Fluoroester Co-Solvents,” United States Patent Application 20080305401. 

(Filed Jan. 15, 2008). 

 

Thomas I. Valdez and S.R. Narayanan, “Ir-DOPED OXIDE” U.S. Patent Appl. No. 12/580,107 

Provisional Patent Applications 

Arumugam Manthiram and Jun Liu, “High Capacity Layered Oxide Cathodes with Enhanced 

Rate Capability,” Serial No. 61/310,194 (March 3, 2010). 

 

Gleb Yushin, Igor Luzinov, Alexandre Magasinski, and Bogdan Zdyrko, “Polymeric Binder for 

High-Performance Silicon Anodes for Li-ion Batteries,” Serial No. 61/261,520 (November 16, 

2009). 

NASA/TM—2011-216963 NASA/TM—2011-216963 4949
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

01-01-2011 

2. REPORT TYPE

Technical Memorandum 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Energy Storage Project 

Final Report

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Mercer, Carolyn, R.; Jankovsky, Amy, L.; Reid, Concha, M.; Miller, Thomas, B.; Hoberecht, 

Mark, A. 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

WBS 038957.01.01.03 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field 

Cleveland, Ohio 44135-3191 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

E-17568 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Washington, DC 20546-0001 

10. SPONSORING/MONITOR'S

 ACRONYM(S)

NASA 

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 REPORT NUMBER

NASA/TM-2011-216963 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified-Unlimited 

Subject Categories: 20 and 44 

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov 

This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 443-757-5802

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

NASA’s Exploration Technology Development Program funded the Energy Storage Project to develop battery and fuel cell technology to 

meet the expected energy storage needs of the Constellation Program for human exploration. Technology needs were determined by 

architecture studies and risk assessments conducted by the Constellation Program, focused on a mission for a long-duration lunar outpost. 

Critical energy storage needs were identified as batteries for EVA suits, surface mobility systems, and a lander ascent stage; fuel cells for the 

lander and mobility systems; and a regenerative fuel cell for surface power. To address these needs, the Energy Storage Project developed 

advanced lithium-ion battery technology, targeting cell-level safety and very high specific energy and energy density. Key accomplishments 

include the development of silicon composite anodes, lithiated-mixed-metal-oxide cathodes, low-flammability electrolytes, and cellincorporated safety devices that promise to substantially improve battery performance while providing a high level of safety. The project 

also developed “non-flow-through” proton-exchange-membrane fuel cell stacks. The primary advantage of this technology set is the 

reduction of ancillary parts in the balance-of-plant--fewer pumps, separators and related components should result in fewer failure modes 

and hence a higher probability of achieving very reliable operation, and reduced parasitic power losses enable smaller reactant tanks and 

therefore systems with lower mass and volume. Key accomplishments include the fabrication and testing of several robust, small-scale nonflow-through fuel cell stacks that have demonstrated proof-of-concept. This report summarizes the project’s goals, objectives, technical 

accomplishments, and risk assessments. A bibliography spanning the life of the project is also included.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Lithium batteries; Electric batteries; Storage batteries; Fuel cells; Hydrogen oxygen fuel cells; Regenerative fuel cells; 

Electrochemical cells; Energy storage 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF

 ABSTRACT

UU 

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

54 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email:help@sti.nasa.gov) 

a. REPORT

U 

b. ABSTRACT

U 

c. THIS 

PAGE

U 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)

443-757-5802 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18