Determining the Composition of Carbonate Solvent Systems Used in Lithium-Ion Batteries without Salt Removal

Mohammad Parhizi, Louis Edwards Caceres-Martinez, Brent A. Modereger, Hilkka I. Kenttämaa, Gozdem Kilaz and Jason K. Ostanek
Additional contact information
Mohammad Parhizi: School of Engineering Technology, Purdue University, 401 N. Grant St., West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
Louis Edwards Caceres-Martinez: School of Engineering Technology, Purdue University, 401 N. Grant St., West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
Brent A. Modereger: Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, 560 Oval Dr., West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
Hilkka I. Kenttämaa: Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, 560 Oval Dr., West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
Gozdem Kilaz: School of Engineering Technology, Purdue University, 401 N. Grant St., West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
Jason K. Ostanek: School of Engineering Technology, Purdue University, 401 N. Grant St., West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA

Energies, 2022, vol. 15, issue 8, 1-14

Abstract: In this work, two methods were investigated for determining the composition of carbonate solvent systems used in lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery electrolytes. One method was based on comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography with electron ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC×GC/EI TOF MS), which often enables unknown compound identification by their electron ionization (EI) mass spectra. The other method was based on comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography with flame ionization detection (GC×GC/FID). Both methods were used to determine the concentrations of six different commonly used carbonates in Li-ion battery electrolytes (i.e., ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate (PC), dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC), and vinylene carbonate (VC) in model compound mixtures (MCMs), single-blind samples (SBS), and a commercially obtained electrolyte solution (COES). Both methods were found to be precise (uncertainty < 5%), accurate (error < 5%), and sensitive (limit of detection <0.12 ppm for FID and <2.7 ppm for MS). Furthermore, unlike the previously reported methods, these methods do not require removing lithium hexafluorophosphate salt (LiPF 6 ) from the sample prior to analysis. Removal of the lithium salt was avoided by diluting the electrolyte solutions prior to analysis (1000-fold dilution) and using minimal sample volumes (0.1 µL) for analysis.

Keywords: lithium-ion batteries; electrolyte; two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC); mass spectrometry (MS); flame ionization detector (FID); analytical techniques (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/8/2805/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/8/2805/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:8:p:2805-:d:791984

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().