NASA NTRSDate not supplied
Battery energy density is one of the most critical design parameters for sizing all-electric aircraft, however it’s easily overestimated. Establishing the effective, usable energy density is confused by varying degrees of margin needed to account for structural and thermal management between different cell chemistry and pack designs. Therefore, a better methodology is needed to fairly compare emerging battery technologies for electric aircraft. Currently, there is a loss of critical information when vehicle trade studies are performed using “nominal” published cell-level performance metrics. Aircraft power demands rarely match these nominal power profiles, and aircraft designers lack the ability to accurately simulate the battery performance and temperature off-nominally unless the battery chemistry is well established. Conversely, battery suppliers have no generalized reference cases to publish more realistic performance metrics. This can lead to poor assumptions, such as aircraft studies assuming a fixed discharge efficiency of a battery, when in reality the usable energy in a pack is dependent on the power and thermal profile. Information needed to properly assess weight penalties for thermal management is also typically poorly characterized when assessing candidate batteries. This paper serves to better inform battery development, and similarly, provide aircraft designers with more realistic assumptions for applying knockdown margins in their designs. Detailed power and thermal performance estimates are provided, which provide a starting point for sizing power and thermal budgets using experimentally derived battery models. Results show that the X-57 battery-to-shaft efficiency is 77.3% for a particular optimized mission. Considering a 25% reserve on the battery capacity, this means that only roughly half of the original 55.3kWh ‘nominal’ pack energy can be converted to useful work during a mission. Further estimates on a clean-sheet VTOL optimization show an average 82.7% battery-to-shaft efficiency, using 98% peak efficiency inverters and 97.4% peak efficiency motors. Although higher battery efficiencies are possible, the resulting weight penalty negates improvement in vehicle performance. These trade-offs and resulting power profiles are provided as a starting point to better assess future battery designs.