Francois Fleming
Research Mentor: Matthew Ding
Mentor Department: Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, Engineering
Author(s): Francois Fleming, Matthew Ding, Arnau Porta-Sans
Session: Session 2 (10:00 AM – 10:50 AM)
Presentation Type: Poster 13
Abstract
Covering over 70% of the Earth’s surface, the ocean has only 5% of its area explored. Our understanding of the ocean’s contents is limited due to the short lifespan of buoys and other marine exploration tools. Focusing on offshore weather monitoring, chemical concentrations and marine life. Battery chemistry can extend this lifespan and determine the capabilities and performance of the buoy’s electronic devices. The research undertaken was to determine the best battery chemistry to store energy and power the entire system of the buoy. The components of the electrical system that the batteries will need to power are the environmental sensors and the control module. Different battery chemistries were investigated to determine the one with the most desirable characteristics. The parameters that were chosen for comparisons were Energy Density, Life Span, and Thermal Stability. Energy Density was chosen because the more energy a battery can store, the smaller the number of battery cells required. Life span is a critical parameter as a longer lifespan means less maintenance. Finally, thermal stability was chosen because certain chemistries are known to overheat easily, which can be dangerous. Overall, Lithium-Manganese-Iron-Phosphate (LMFP) emerged as the top-performing chemistry on a performance basis, combining higher gravimetric energy density (up to ~230 Wh/kg) with strong cycle life (Ëœ2,000–3,000 cycles) and high thermal stability. However, because LMFP remains limited in commercial availability and is still maturing technologically, Lithium-Iron-Phosphate (LFP) is the most practical near-term choice. While LFP offers lower maximum energy density (up to ~170 Wh/kg), it provides excellent durability (Ëœ2,000–6,000 cycles) and very high thermal stability, making it the most viable option for current deployment. As LMFP commercialization progresses, it may become a competitive successor where higher energy density is prioritized without sacrificing safety.
