Michelle A. Manzo

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

D. Michael Strawn and Stephen W. Hall

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane, Indiana

Aerospace Nickel-Cadmium

Cell Verification—Final Report

NASA/TM—2001-210598

January 2001
The NASA STI Program Office . . . in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to

the advancement of aeronautics and space

science. The NASA Scientific and Technical

Information (STI) Program Office plays a key part

in helping NASA maintain this important role.

The NASA STI Program Office is operated by

Langley Research Center, the Lead Center for

NASA’s scientific and technical information. The

NASA STI Program Office provides access to the

NASA STI Database, the largest collection of

aeronautical and space science STI in the world.

The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional

mechanism for disseminating the results of its

research and development activities. These results

are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report

Series, which includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of

completed research or a major significant

phase of research that present the results of

NASA programs and include extensive data

or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations

of significant scientific and technical data and

information deemed to be of continuing

reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peerreviewed formal professional papers but

has less stringent limitations on manuscript

length and extent of graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific

and technical findings 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. Scientific and

technical findings by NASA-sponsored

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected

papers from scientific and technical

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other

meetings sponsored or cosponsored by

NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific,

technical, or historical information from

NASA programs, projects, and missions,

often concerned with subjects having

substantial public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientific

and technical material pertinent to NASA’s

mission.

Specialized services that complement the STI

Program Office’s diverse offerings include

creating custom thesauri, building customized

data bases, organizing and publishing research

results . . . even providing videos.

For more information about the NASA STI

Program Office, 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 Access

Help Desk at 301–621–0134

• Telephone the NASA Access Help Desk at

301–621–0390

• Write to:

 NASA Access Help Desk

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information

 7121 Standard Drive

 Hanover, MD 21076
NASA/TM—2001-210598

January 2001

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

Michelle A. Manzo

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

D. Michael Strawn and Stephen W. Hall

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane, Indiana

Aerospace Nickel-Cadmium

Cell Verification—Final Report

Prepared for the

Long Beach Battery Conference 2001

sponsored by California State University, Long Beach

Long Beach, California, January 9–12, 2001
Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the cell manufacturers for their cooperation and assistance with this technology

assessment. We also acknowledge that Sanyo donated the five standard design Ni-Cd cells that were

tested under this program.

Available from

NASA Center for Aerospace Information

7121 Standard Drive

Hanover, MD 21076

Price Code: A03

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22100

Price Code: A03

Trade names or manufacturers’ names are used in this report for

identification only. This usage does not constitute an official

endorsement, either expressed or implied, by the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/GLTRS
NASA/TM—2001-210598 1 

Aerospace Nickel-Cadmium Cell Verification—Final Report 

Michelle A. Manzo,a D. Michael Strawn,b and Stephen W. Hallb,c

a

NASA Glenn Research Center, 21000 Brookpark Road, MS 309–1, Cleveland, OH 44135 b

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division, 300 Highway 361, Code 6095, Crane, IN 47522, cretired 

ABSTRACT 

During the early years of satellites, NASA successfully flew “NASA-Standard” nickel-cadmium (Ni-Cd) cells manufactured 

by GE/Gates/SAFT on a variety of spacecraft. In 1992 a NASA Battery Review Board determined that the strategy of a NASA 

Standard Cell and Battery Specification and the accompanying NASA control of a standard manufacturing control document 

(MCD) for Ni-Cd cells and batteries was unwarranted. As a result of that determination, standards were abandoned and the use of

cells other than the NASA Standard was required. In order to gain insight into the performance and characteristics of the various 

aerospace Ni-Cd products available, tasks were initiated within the NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Program that 

involved the procurement and testing of representative aerospace Ni-Cd cell designs. A standard set of test conditions was 

established in order to provide similar information about the products from various vendors. The objective of this testing was to 

provide independent verification of representative commercial flight cells available in the marketplace today. 

 This paper will provide a summary of the verification tests run on cells from various manufacturers: Sanyo 35 Ampere-hour 

(Ah) standard and 35 Ah advanced Ni-Cd cells, SAFT 50 Ah Ni-Cd cells and Eagle-Picher 21 Ah Magnum and 21 Ah Super NiCdTM cells from Eagle-Picher were put through a full evaluation. A limited number of 18 Ah and 55 Ah cells from Acme Electric 

were also tested to provide an initial evaluation of the Acme aerospace cell designs. Additionally, 35 Ah aerospace design Ni-MH 

cells from Sanyo were evaluated under the standard conditions established for this program. The test program is essentially 

complete. The cell design parameters, the verification test plan and the details of the test result well will be discussed. 

Introduction 

In the early 1970's NASA established Standard 20 Ah and 

50 Ah Ni-Cd cell designs. General Electric was identified 

as the only qualified manufacturer of NASA Standard 

nickel-cadmium cells. Throughout the 1970's and early 

1980's, a large number of successful flight programs 

utilized the conventional GE/Gates Ni-Cd cell designs. In 

the mid 1970's, Pellon Corporation, ceased production of 

Pellon 2505, the separator used in the NASA Standard cell 

designs. Supplies were stockpiled for future use. However, 

in the late 1980's, degradation of the stock of available 

Pellon 2505, combined with some plate problems, resulted 

in performance anomalies with the NASA Standard Ni-Cd 

cells. The use of replacement materials resulted in 

somewhat different operational characteristics for the 

NASA Standard Ni-Cd cells. Finally, in the early 1990's, 

NASA began to encounter a number of problems with the 

50 Ah standard design cells onboard orbiting spacecraft. 

As a result, the NASA Deputy Administrator convened a 

NASA Battery Review Board in 1992. 

 The NASA Battery Review Board determined that the 

strategy of a NASA Standard Cell and Battery 

Specification and the accompanying NASA control of a 

standard manufacturing control document (MCD) for NiCd cells and batteries was unwarranted. At the same time it 

noted that advanced Ni-Cd and Ni-H2 technologies were 

maturing and alternate cell designs were becoming available 

from new sources. The Battery Review Board recommended 

that the NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Program 

activities be expanded to provide independent verification of 

representative Ni-Cd and Ni-H2 cells from various 

manufacturers. This paper summarizes the Ni-Cd cell 

verification activities that were initiated as a result of that 

recommendation. 

Cell Verification Test Items 

The cell verification test program involved verification 

testing of aerospace design cells from various manufacturers. 

The test articles were 21, 35 Ah advanced design Ni-Cd cells 

and 5, 35 Ah standard design Ni-Cd cells from Sanyo; 21, 50 

Ah Ni-Cd cells from SAFT; 26, 21 Ah Magnum Ni-Cd cells 

and 26, 21 Ah Super Ni-CdTM cells from Eagle-Picher, and 

12 each, 18 Ah and 55 Ah aerospace design Ni-Cd cells from 

Acme Electric. Details of the cell designs are shown in Tables 

I through III. The Sanyo and SAFT cell designs represent 

conventional technology, cells with chemically impregnated 

plates and nylon separators; the Magnum and Super Ni-CdTM 

cell designs incorporate advanced features like 

electrochemically impregnated plates and non-nylon 

separators. The Acme technology incorporates pasted fiber 

electrodes and polypropylene or nylon separators. 
NASA/TM—2001-210598 2 

In addition to the Ni-Cd cells 25, 35 Ah Ni-MH cells, 

manufactured by Sanyo, were evaluated under similar test 

conditions to those used for the Ni-Cd cells. Design 

parameters for the Ni-MH cells are shown in Table I. 

Cell Verification Test Plan 

 All cell testing being performed as part of this program 

was conducted at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane, 

IN. The test plan for cells undergoing verification testing 

involved the following: 

1) initial inspection of the cells upon receipt at Crane; 

2) a repeat of portions of the manufacturer's acceptance 

tests to verify the performance demonstrated at the 

manufacturer's facility; 

3) performance of the NASA Standard Acceptance Test 

Procedure (ATP) to establish baseline characteristics; 

4) the establishment of V/T levels for each cell design; 

5) vibration testing; 

6) Low-Earth-Orbit (LEO) cycling at 40% DOD and 0o

, 

20o

 and 30oC and accelerated geosynchronous-orbit 

(GEO) testing at 80% DOD and 

7) the performance of destructive physical analysis on one 

cell of each design to establish baseline characteristics. 

Details of the test conditions were discussed in a 

previous publication (1). 

Test Results 

The test program is nearly complete. Of the twenty-one 

packs on LEO testing, only five packs continue to cycle 

and of the five packs originally on GEO test, two continue 

to cycle. The remaining packs have failed. 

The results of the tests listed under items 1 through 5 of 

the verification test plan were discussed in detail in 

previous publications (2,3,4). A summary of the test results 

follows. 

Initial Inspection Upon Receipt of Cells

The incoming inspection testing showed that all cells 

tested as part of the verification test were leak free upon 

receipt at Crane. 

Repeat of the Manufacturer's Acceptance Testing

For cells from each of the vendors, a representative 

performance/capacity determination cycle was repeated to 

verify performance demonstrated at the manufacturer’s 

facilities. For Sanyo cells, the results obtained at the 

factory were reproduced at Crane with the average group 

capacity measurements being within 1 Ah of one another. 

The Ni-MH cells from Sanyo exhibited very uniform 

capacities, however, the group exhibited a slightly lower 

capacity when tested at Crane, 36.2 Ah vs. 38.6 Ah based 

on tests at Sanyo. 

 Test results for the Eagle-Picher Magnum and Super NiCdTM cells and the SAFT Ni-Cd cells agreed with those 

obtained at the manufacturer’s plant prior to cell shipment. 

 In the repeat of the manufacturer’s ATP run on the Acme 

cells, the capacities measured at Crane following a resistive 

let down were generally comparable or slightly higher than 

those measured at Acme. The steady state capacity measured 

at Crane for three of the four groups of the Acme cells was 

10% less than that reported by the manufacturer. 

NASA Standard Acceptance Testing

The NASA Standard ATP was designed to verify the lotto-lot performance of the NASA Standard Cells. The NASA 

Standard ATP was run to provide a common baseline for 

information only. With minor exceptions, the cells from all of 

the manufacturers generally met all of the requirements that 

were established for the NASA Standard cell designs. 

V/T Level Determination

The Standard NASA V/T curves were established in the 

early 1970's. They are a set of eight parallel lines separated 

by 20mV increments. The lines represent voltage limits that 

should be selected at various temperatures to achieve 

different levels of charge return. These curves, like the 

NASA ATP requirements are specific to the NASA Standard 

cell designs. 

As part of this test program, unique V/T levels were 

established for each manufacturer via an approach that more 

closely relates to controlling the recharge ratio. Two sets of 

V/T curves were established for this test program. One was 

applied for the SAFT and Acme cells and the second was 

used for the Sanyo and EPI cells. Details of the V/T level 

determination and the results are documented in previous 

publications (1,3,4). 

Vibration Testing

Vibration testing was completed on representative cells 

from each of the manufacturers. In all cases, the cells passed 

the vibration test with no voltage or current perturbations. 

LEO Life Cycle Testing

 All LEO testing was performed at 40% depth-of-discharge 

(DOD) based on nameplate capacity. The LEO regime was a 

90-minute cycle with 60 minutes for charge and 30 minutes 

for discharge. The cells were tested in packs of five cells 

connected in series. The packs were charged at the 0.8C rate 

to the appropriate V/T cutoff, then the charge current was 

allowed to taper for the remainder of the charge period. The 

packs were discharged to 40% DOD at the 0.8C rate for the 

discharge portion of the orbit. Tests were run at 0o

C, 20oC, or 

30o

C. The results of the LEO life cycling tests are 

summarized in Figures 1 through 4. The figures show the 

end-of-charge voltages (EOCV), end-of-discharge-voltages 

(EODV) and recharge ratio as a function of cycle number for 

the minimum cell, maximum cell and the average of the five 
NASA/TM—2001-210598 3 

cells in the pack. The Ni-Cd packs were grouped by test 

condition and the performance was plotted against a 

common range of cycles on the x-axis to aid in the 

comparison of results between test conditions and 

manufacturers. The packs were run with an attempt to 

minimize recharge ratio while maintaining a stable EODV. 

Throughout the LEO life testing, V/T levels were increased 

when the pack exhibited a relatively low recharge ratio 

combined with a decline in EODV. The manufacturer 

specific V/T curves generated as part of this program were 

used when adjusting V/T levels. Failure is defined as the 

point where the EODV falls below 1.0 volt and does not 

respond to recharge ratio adjustments, or where the pack 

becomes unmanageable on cycling, or where other 

unfavorable conditions, such as pack swelling or cell 

leakage, are observed. 

NASA Standard Stress Test Conditions - The majority 

of the testing was performed under the NASA Standard 

Stress Test conditions - 40% DOD and 20o

C. Cells are 

generally found acceptable for flight if they can perform 

successfully for two years, or 12,000 cycles under these 

test conditions. The results of the testing under the NASA 

Standard Stress Test conditions are shown in Figure 1. 

The tests were not all started at the same time. To date, 

testing on the Sanyo, SAFT and Acme cells has been 

completed. The testing of the Eagle-Picher Magnum and 

SuperTM Ni-Cd cells is continuing and scheduled for 

termination at the end of February 2001. 

The packs of Acme 18 Ah and 55 Ah cells exhibited very 

uniform, stable performance over the cycle period. The 55 

Ah pack from Acme with polypropylene separators was the 

first to fail at 7955 cycles. The remaining packs of Acme 

cells exhibited similar cycle performance, all failing at 

approximately 10,300 cycles. These were the first 

aerospace design cells produced by Acme. The prototype 

cells performed very well considering the maturity of the 

design. Acme indicated that design modifications and 

processing changes could be instituted to address the 

limitations of these cells. 

The SAFT pack was discontinued at 18,730 cycles. They 

exceeded the two-year LEO cycle requirement with 

EODV’s >1.0 volt, however, the cells exhibited relatively 

low EODV’s, between 1.0 and 1.1 volts and required 

recharge ratios in the range of 115-125% to maintain the 

EODV. 

The standard and advanced design Ni-Cd cell packs from 

Sanyo cycled in excess of 4.5 and 5.5 years respectively 

under the NASA Standard Stress Test conditions. (Only the 

advanced Ni-Cd pack data is shown in Figure 1.) The 

Sanyo cell packs required very low recharge ratios to 

maintain their EODV’s but exhibited a fairly rapid decline 

in EODV as a function of cycles thus requiring frequent 

adjustments to the V/T levels. The EOCV for the Sanyo 

pack increased from 1.42 to 1.50 volts over the 32,326 

cycles the pack performed. 

 The Eagle-Picher Magnum and Super Ni-CdTM packs have 

accumulated 26,430 and 25,511 cycles respectively. These 

packs continue to cycle. These packs generally required 

frequent adjustments in V/T levels to maintain EODV and 

operated with an EODV less than 1.10 volts. Both EaglePicher packs exhibited stable EOCV performance at 

approximately 1.42 – 1.44 volts. 

Low Temperature Stress Test Conditions - The results 

of the low temperature stress test are shown in Figure 2. This 

test consisted of 40% DOD cycling at 0o

C. Ni-Cd cell packs 

from Sanyo, SAFT and Eagle-Picher were tested under this 

regime. To date only the SAFT pack has failed under these 

test conditions (25,518 cycles). Current cycle numbers are 

34,740 cycles for the Sanyo Advanced design pack and 

26,296 and 25,597 cycles for the Eagle-Picher Super and 

Magnum Ni-Cd packs. The Eagle-Picher Super Ni-CdTM

exhibited the highest EODV performance of all of the packs 

tested at 0o

C. The EODV degraded from 1.15 volts at the 

start of LEO testing to 1.10 volts over the first 18,000 cycles. 

The pack exhibited a more rapid degradation in EODV over 

the next 6,000 cycles from 1.10 volts to 1.05 volts. An 

increase in the recharge ratio at 24,000 cycles raised the 

EODV to 1.10 volts. The EP Magnum pack showed an 

EODV of 1.15 volts over the first 14,000 cycles, then 

gradually degraded to <1.05 volts over the next 4,000 cycles, 

then remained stable at 1.03-1.05 volts over the last six 

thousand cycles. The Sanyo cell pack exhibited a slow decay 

in EODV from 1.15 volts to 1.05 volts over 28,000 cycles. 

An increase in the recharge ratio at 18,000 cycles resulted in 

raising the EODV to 1.10 volts. 

High Temperature Stress Test Conditions - Figure 3 

summarizes the results for the high temperature stress test that 

was run at 40% DOD and 30o

C. All of the cell packs tested 

under these conditions have failed. The SAFT pack could not 

maintain an EODV >1.0 volt under these severe test conditions. 

At 2,200 cycles the pack was removed from test, reconditioned 

and returned to test at 10o

C where it operated successfully for 

an additional 22,000 cycles. The Sanyo pack exhibited a 

constant increase in EOCV over its 15,900 cycles. Recharge 

ratios ranging from 102 to 106% were required to maintain the 

EODV at 30o

C. At 15,900 cycles the pack exhibited some 

slight swelling and was removed from test. Again the EaglePicher Super Ni-CdTM and Magnum Ni-Cd packs exhibited 

very similar performance. Both packs initially required very 

high recharge ratios to maintain the EODV’s. The recharge 

ratio gradually decreased from 120% to ~105% over the first 

4,000 cycles and remained fairly stable thereafter. The Super 

Ni-CdTM pack showed more dispersion than the Magnum pack 

and failed at 17,193 cycles while the Magnum pack achieved 

20,431 cycles to failure. The Sanyo and Eagle-Picher cells 

demonstrated significant life under these very stressful test 

conditions. The performance of the Sanyo cells is also 

impressive as these cells contained nylon separators that are 

subject to degradation at the higher temperatures. 

 
NASA/TM—2001-210598 4 

Ni-MH LEO Test Results - The LEO cycle test results on 

the Sanyo Ni-MH cells are summarized in Figure 4. These 

tests were all run at 40% DOD and different temperatures, 

0o

, 20o (2-packs) or 40oC. In general, the Ni-MH packs 

demonstrated slightly lower EODV’s and significantly 

fewer cycles to failure than Ni-Cd packs cycled under 

similar conditions and more specifically than Sanyo Ni-Cd 

packs tested under similar conditions. The Ni-MH packs 

tested under the NASA Standard Stress Test conditions 

exhibited 15,243 and 15,763 cycles compared to the Sanyo 

Ni-Cd packs which achieved 28,241 and >30,864 cycles. 

Even though the Ni-MH cells exhibited lower cycle life 

that Ni-Cd cells tested under similar conditions, the packs 

demonstrated cycle life in excess of two years under the 

NASA Standard Stress Test conditions, which indicates 

they would have acceptable performance for nominal LEO 

missions. Testing at the temperature extremes showed 

similar results with the cycle life demonstrated for the NiMH cells being less that 50% of the life demonstrated for 

Sanyo Ni-Cd cells tested under similar conditions. 

GEO Life Cycle Testing 

 The accelerated GEO testing involves a simulation of the 

seasonal variations during eclipse period followed by a 

shortened two-week sun period. The maximum DOD on 

the pack is 80%. The cells are charged at C/10 to 105% 

charge return followed by a trickle charge for the 

remainder of the charge time. The full sun periods are 

simulated with a C/100 trickle charge. 

Two of the four Ni-Cd packs on GEO test have failed. 

The Eagle-Picher Magnum pack exhibited the poorest 

GEO performance of those tested. One cell of the five-cell 

pack exhibited a low EODV (<1.0 volt) and was removed 

from the pack during the fourth shadow period. A second 

cell dropped below the cutoff during the fifth eclipse 

period. The pack did not respond to reconditioning and was 

removed from cycling following the fifth shadow period. 

The SAFT pack was the next to fail. This pack was 

removed from test following the twenty-first eclipse when 

the cells began to exhibit temperature excursions during 

charge. The pack was reconditioned following the 

nineteenth eclipse period. This led to an increase in the 

EODV from 0.85 volts for the lowest cell to ~1.03 volts on 

the subsequent eclipse. However the recovery was shortlived, with the EODV falling below 1.0 volt during the 

twenty-first eclipse. 

The Sanyo pack and the Eagle-Picher Super Ni-CdTM

pack continue to cycle. The Sanyo has completed thirty 

seven shadow period with the EODV of the lowest cell 

remaining at ~1.02 volts. The EP-Super Ni-CdTM pack was 

started after the Sanyo pack and has also performed quite 

well through twenty-nine eclipse periods to date. For 

comparison purposes, performance for both packs remaining 

on test was evaluated through the first twenty-nine eclipse 

periods. Both packs performed quite well. The Sanyo pack 

exhibited more uniform pack performance throughout the 

cycle time. EODV for the lowest cell in the Sanyo pack for 

eclipse twenty-nine was 1.05 volts, with a pack average of 

1.07 volts. The EP Super Ni-CdTM pack had slightly higher 

voltages but more spread between the individual cells with 

the lowest cell reading ~1.05 volts and the average of the five 

cells at 1.08 volts. Both packs ran at about 106% recharge 

throughout the twenty-nine eclipse period. 

Finally, the Sanyo Ni-MH cycled through eighteen eclipse 

periods before being removed from test for a low EODV and 

increasing EOCV. The pack ran at about 106% recharge 

throughout its life. 

Concluding Remarks 

 The NASA sponsored aerospace Ni-Cd Verification test 

program has been completed. Aerospace Ni-Cd and Ni-MH 

cells from SAFT, Sanyo, Acme, and EP were evaluated in a 

one-time snapshot of ‘representative’ cells. The cells 

produced by Sanyo and EP demonstrated performance that 

indicates suitability for nominal LEO missions. The Sanyo 

and EP-Super Ni-CdTM cells also demonstrated acceptable 

performance for GEO applications as well. Indeed, since this 

program was initiated, NASA and other users have 

successfully flown alternate technologies for a variety of LEO 

and GEO missions.

References 

 

1. Manzo, M. A. and Hall, S. W., 1995 “Aerospace NickelCadmium Cell Verification,” Proceedings, 30th

International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, 

Vol. 1, pp. 91–100.

2. Manzo M. A. and Hall, S.W., 1997 “Aerospace NickelCadmium Cell Verification – An Update”, Proceedings 

32nd International Energy Conversion Engineering 

Conference, Vol. 1, pp 99–107. 

3. Hall, S. W. and Manzo, M. A., 1996 “Results of V/T 

Verification” Proceedings, 29th NASA Aerospace Battery 

Workshop, pp. 493–498. 

4. Hall, S. W. and Manzo M. A., 1997 “Development of 

Voltage Temperature Curves Specific to Cell Designs”, 

Proceedings 32nd International Energy Conversion 

Engineering Conference, Vol. 1, pp 108–112.
NASA/TM—2001-210598 5 

TABLE I - CELL DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR SANYO AND SAFT CELLS 

PARAMETER SANYO N-35S/L11 SAFT - VOS50AKBC SANYO NI-MH 

POSITIVE 

ELECTRODE 

NEGATIVE 

ELECTRODE 

POSITIVE 

ELECTRODE 

NEGATIVE 

ELECTRODE 

POSITIVE 

ELECTRODE 

NEGATIVE 

ELECTRODE 

ELECTRODE 

DIMENSIONS (mm) 

104.4 x 100 x 

0.63 

104.4 x 100 x 

0.80 

150 x 110 x 0.79 150 x 110 x 0.92 104.4 x 80 x 

0.603 

104.4 x 80 x 

0.45 

PLAQUE POROSITY 85% 86% N/A N/A 84% N/A 

LOADING LEVEL 2.43 g/cc void 3.0 g/cc void 13.8 g/dm2

 18 g/dm2 2.43 g/cc void N/A 

NUMBER OF PLATES 13 14 13 14 16 17 

IMPREGNATION CHEMICAL CHEMICAL CHEMICAL CHEMICAL CHEMICAL N/A 

 CAPACITY 

 THEORETICAL 

 ACTUAL 

 UTILIZATION 

46.8 Ah 

42.6 Ah 

91% 

101.0 Ah 

69.7 Ah 

69% 

49.94 Ah2

61 Ah 

57 Ah3

88.89 Ah2

109.8 Ah 

96.9 Ah3

44.7 Ah 

40.7 Ah 

92% 

79.1 Ah 

290mAh/g 

NEG:POS RATIO 1.64 1.8 1.94 

SEPARATOR 

FT215N - WASHED NYLON, 

98g/m2

, 0.22 mm thick 

FTR3, 50 g/m2

0.28 mm thick 

NYLON - 95g/m2

0.22mm thick 

PRE CHG CAPACITY 12 Ah 5 -15 Ah 0 

ELECTROLYTE 98g, 31% KOH 218 g, 31 % KOH 91g, 31% KOH, 

PLATE TREATMENT NEGATIVE - ORGANIC PLATE 

TREATMENT 

NONE NONE 

CELL DIMENSIONS (mm) 115.2 x 106.9 x 25.2 200.5 x 113.8 x 31.5 95.2 x 106.9 x 25.2 

CELL WEIGHT 1050 g 1980 g 872 g 

CELL CAPACITY 38.7 Ah 50 Ah/61 Ah 37.4 Ah (actual @ 10o

C) 

1

 1N-35S/G0 design parameters are identical to N-35S/L1 except for unwashed separator and untreated negative plates 

2

 SAFT values are for nominal capacity 3 SAFT values are for guaranteed minimum capacity 

TABLE II - CELL DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR EAGLE-PICHER SUPER Ni-CdTM AND MAGNUM Ni-Cd CELLS 

EP - SUPER Ni-CdTM EP-MAGNUM 

PARAMETER POSITIVE 

ELECTRODE 

NEGATIVE 

ELECTRODE 

POSITIVE 

ELECTRODE 

NEGATIVE 

ELECTRODE 

ELECTRODE DIMENSIONS (mm) 92.2 x 89.9 x 0.71 92.2 x 89.9 x 0.81 92.2 x 89.9 x 0.74 92.2 x 89.9 x 0.81 

PLAQUE POROSITY 84% 84% 84% 84% 

LOADING LEVEL g/cc void 1.65±0.2 2.1±0.2 1.65±0.2 2.1±0.2 

NUMBER OF PLATES 13 14 13 14 

IMPREGNATION ELECTROCHEMICAL 

ELECTROCHEMICAL ELECTROCHEMICAL ELECTROCHEMICAL 

 CAPACITY 

 THEORETICAL 

 ACTUAL 

 UTILIZATION 

28.2 Ah 

23.5 Ah 

87% 

56.3 Ah 28.7 Ah 

24.4 Ah 

 87% 

56.3 Ah 

NEG:POS RATIO 2.0 1.99 

SEPARATOR 

ZIRCONIUM OXIDE W/POLYMER 

IMPREGNATION 

POLYPROPYLENE W/ POLYMER 

IMPREGNATION 

PRE CHG CAPACITY 30-40% OF EXCESS NEG 30-40% OF EXCESS NEG 

ELECTROLYTE 99g, 31% KOH, 

 PROPRIETARY ADDITIVE 

91g, 31% KOH, 

 PROPRIETARY ADDITIVE 

PLATE TREATMENT NONE NONE 

CELL DIMENSIONS (mm) 118.6 x 95.0 x 28.8 118.6 x 95.0 x 28.8 

CELL WEIGHT 977 g 948 g 

CELL CAPACITY 24.4 Ah (ACTUAL @10o

C) 24.4 Ah (ACTUAL @10oC) 
NASA/TM—2001-210598 6 

. 

Sanyo 35 Ah Advanced Design Ni-Cd 

Eagle-Picher 21 Ah Super Ni-Cd 

Eagle-Picher 21 Ah Magnum Ni-Cd 

Fig 1 – End of half cycle voltages vs. cycle numbers for cells from all manufacturers – NASA Standard Stress Test 

conditions, 40% DOD, 20oC x-Vavg, ◊Vmax, ∆ Vmin, - % Recharge 

Sanyo 35 Ah Advanced Design Ni-Cd 

SAFT 50 Ah Ni-Cd 

Acme 18 Ah Ni-Cd, Nylon Separator 

Acme 18 Ah Ni-Cd, Polypropylene 

Separator 

Acme 55 Ah Ni-Cd, Polypropylene 

Separator 

Acme 55 Ah Ni-Cd, Nylon Separator 
NASA/TM—2001-210598 7 

Fig. 3 – End of half cycle voltages vs. cycle number for 

high temperature stress test conditions – 40% DOD, 

30oC. x Vavg, ◊ Vmax, ∆ 9PLQ -% Recharge 

Fig. 2 – End of half cycle voltages vs. cycle number for low 

temperature stress test conditions – 40% DOD, 0oC. x Vavg, 

◊ Vmax, ∆ 9PLQ -% Recharge 

Sanyo 35 Ah Advanced Design Ni-Cd 

SAFT 50 Ah Ni-Cd 

Eagle-Picher 21 Ah Super Ni-Cd Eagle-Picher 21 Ah Super Ni-Cd 

SAFT 50 Ah Ni-Cd 

Sanyo 35 Ah Advanced Design Ni-Cd 

Eagle-Picher 21 Ah Magnum Ni-Cd Eagle-Picher 21 Ah Magnum Ni-Cd 
NASA/TM—2001-210598 8 

Fig 4 – End of half cycle voltages vs. cycle number for Sanyo Ni-MH cells at all stress test conditions – 40% DOD and 

various temperatures. x Vavg, ◊Vmax, ∆ Vmin, -%Recharge 

TABLE III – CELL DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR ACME CELLS 

 SPFNC-X18 SPFNC-X55 

PARAMETER POSITIVE 

 ELECTRODE 

NEGATIVE 

ELECTRODE 

POSITIVE 

ELECTRODE 

NEGATIVE 

ELECTRODE 

ELECTRODE DIMENSIONS (mm) 95 x 62 x 1.44 95 x 62 x .82 116 x 110 x 1.44 116 x 110 x 0.78 

PLAQUE POROSITY (%) 81 79 79 78 

LOADING LEVEL ( g/cc void) 1.51 2.42 1.51 2.63 

NUMBER OF PLATES 8 16 12 24 

IMPREGNATION PROCESS MECHANICAL 

VIBRATION 

MECHANICAL 

VIBRATION 

MECHANICAL 

VIBRATION 

MECHANICAL 

VIBRATION 

PLATE TREATMENT N/A ANTIAGGLOMERATE 

N/A ANTIAGGLOMERATE 

THEORETICAL CAPACITY 20.6 Ah 60.8 Ah 66.8 Ah 202.2 Ah 

SEPARATOR NYLON POLYPROPYLENE NYLON POLYPROPYLENE 

 % UTILIZATION OF POSITIVE 91 91 90 90 

NEG:POS RATIO 2.78 2.78 3 3 

THEORETICAL CD RESERVE 

 CHARGED (Ah) 

 DISCHARGED (Ah) 

25.2 

15 

25.2 

15 

92.4 

43 

94.4 

41 

ELECTROLYTE - (g) 

8M KOH, 0.8M LIOH 

85 89 231 246 

CELL WEIGHT(g) 722 +/- 3 725 +/- 3 g 2120 +/- 7 2080 +/- 7 

CELL DIMENSIONS (mm) 115 x 54 x 168 67 x 35 x 141 

CELL CAPACITY 18.8 +/ 0.5 59.5 +/- 1 

Sanyo 35Ah Ni-MH STD, 0oC 

Sanyo 35Ah Ni-MH STD, 30oC 

Sanyo 35Ah Ni-MH STD, 20oC 

Sanyo 35Ah Ni-MH w/Li, 20oC 
This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 301–621–0390.

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

2. REPORT DATE

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

 OF ABSTRACT

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

 OF THIS PAGE

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 Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson

Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18

298-102

Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

5. FUNDING NUMBERS

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

6. AUTHOR(S)

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

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

14. SUBJECT TERMS

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

 OF REPORT

16. PRICE CODE

15. NUMBER OF PAGES

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

Unclassified Unclassified

Technical Memorandum

Unclassified

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field

Cleveland, Ohio 44135–3191

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

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

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546–0001

Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/GLTRS

January 2001

NASA TM—2001-210598

E–12556

WU–755–A4–08–00

14

A03

Battery; Ni-Cd

Unclassified -Unlimited

Subject Categories: 20 and 44 Distribution: Nonstandard

Michelle A. Manzo, D. Michael Strawn, and Stephen W. Hall

Aerospace Nickel-Cadmium Cell Verification—Final Report

Prepared for the Long Beach Battery Conference 2001 sponsored by California State University, Long Beach, Long Beach,

California, January 9–12, 2001. Michelle A. Manzo, NASA Glenn Research Center, D. Michael Strawn and Stephen W.

Hall (retired), Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division, 300 Highway 361, Code 6095, Crane, Indiana 47522.

Responsible person, Michelle A. Manzo, organization code 5420, 216–433–5261.

During the early years of satellites, NASA successfully flew “NASA-Standard” nickel-cadmium (Ni-Cd) cells manufactured by GE/

Gates/SAFT on a variety of spacecraft. In 1992 a NASA Battery Review Board determined that the strategy of a NASA Standard Cell

and Battery Specification and the accompanying NASA control of a standard manufacturing control document (MCD) for Ni-Cd cells

and batteries was unwarranted. As a result of that determination, standards were abandoned and the use of cells other than the NASA

Standard was required. In order to gain insight into the performance and characteristics of the various aerospace Ni-Cd products

available, tasks were initiated within the NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Program that involved the procurement and testing of

representative aerospace Ni-Cd cell designs. A standard set of test conditions was established in order to provide similar information

about the products from various vendors. The objective of this testing was to provide independent verification of representative commercial flight cells available in the marketplace today. This paper will provide a summary of the verification tests run on cells from various

manufacturers: Sanyo 35 Ampere-hour (Ah) standard and 35 Ah advanced Ni-Cd cells, SAFT 50 Ah Ni-Cd cells and Eagle-Picher 21 Ah

Magnum and 21 Ah Super Ni-CdTM cells from Eagle-Picher were put through a full evaluation. A limited number of 18 and 55 Ah cells

from Acme Electric were also tested to provide an initial evaluation of the Acme aerospace cell designs. Additionally, 35 Ah aerospace

design Ni-MH cells from Sanyo were evaluated under the standard conditions established for this program. The test program is essentially complete. The cell design parameters, the verification test plan and the details of the test result will be discussed.