The widespread adoption of electric mobility has accelerated decarbonization in transportation applications, increasing the reliance on lithium-ion batteries (Li-IBs) in electric vehicles (EVs) and energy storage systems. To analyze battery risk under different combinations of ambient temperature, discharge C-rate, and state-of-charge (SoC) windows, this study experimentally investigates power fade (PF) and capacity fade (CF) as degradation-based risk indicators. In addition to experimental observations, degradation conditions reported in previous studies are considered to identify reliable and unreliable operating zones. Several variables, including operating temperature, current rate, and SoC, influence the short- and long-term performance of Li-IBs in EV applications and should be evaluated from a safety perspective. Under combined thermal and electrical operating conditions, battery degradation progresses, associated with reductions in usable energy and power, increased internal heat generation, and increased safety risks. Due to the nonlinear behavior of Li-IBs, conventional risk models may not always fully represent battery performance; therefore, qualitative analysis and risk assessment are employed. Aging is monitored using discharge capacity, discharge energy, power rating, internal resistance, and open-circuit voltage within the proposed framework. The experimental results show that operational risk increases under high discharge C-rates combined with low ambient temperature. Discharging at 0.2 C at 25 °C with an SoC of 80% is identified as a critical operating scenario within the investigated conditions, as it results in both CF and PF. In contrast, Li-IB safety is not significantly affected under CF conditions at 4 C and 3 C at 10 °C at the same SoC level, nor under PF conditions at 0.2 C at 10 °C with SoC levels of 80% and 50%. The multi-indicator risk assessment combines individual indicators to compare operating conditions in terms of associated safety risk. Finally, the results confirm that relying on a single performance indicator tends to underestimate degradation, while a combined multi-indicator approach provides a better representation of Li-IB performance over battery lifetime.
Ali et al. (Thu,) studied this question.