Welcome back everyone! I’m Jordan Giesige and this is The Limiting Factor.
This video is to correct an error I made on the Tabless Electrode Video. Today I’ll
cover the error, how the error was made, and if it had any impact on the primary benefits
of the tabless electrode patent – the short answer is no.
But first, an explanation as to why I’ve chosen to make a separate correction video.
There are four reasons: 1) Rather than waiting for the next video,
it allows me to get the correction to you more quickly.
2) It allows me to link a specific video to the video containing the error, without breaking
all the links that have formed to the original video.
3) It keeps the next video from getting cluttered and going off topic.
4) The error wasn’t significant enough to take the tabless patent video down and replace
it. The error I made was assuming that Tesla’s
battery electrodes were coated on a single side. As I’ve found since dropping that
video, it appears most manufacturers coat both sides of the electrode with active materials.
Thanks to those who pointed this out in the comments. I verified this information with
a battery expert and watched battery disassembly videos to cross verify.
I assumed that the electrodes were coated on a single side for the following reasons:
1) Tesla’s patent focused on a single sided electrode design, it only mentioned double
sided as a passing comment. 2) None of the diagrams I pulled up illustrated
a double sided electrode 3) The research I’d read indicated that
a double sided anode AND cathode may not actually result in the most energy dense batteries
with the highest cycle life. 4) Double sided electrodes add complexity
and may reduce yield rate. In other words, double sided electrodes may increase the amount
of batteries that are scrapped with defects. This doesn’t affect my calculations for
battery day. It also doesn’t affect the advantages of a tabless electrode design,
and it doesn’t affect the potential benefits of Maxwell Dry Battery Electrode tech for
doing double-sided coatings. Some of you may find this to be a minor error,
others may view it as a major error. My view is that I’ll share everything that I learn,
and when I learn that my assumptions are incorrect, I’ll take the appropriate action to share
that information as well. There were also some comments on both the
Toilet Paper Livestream video and the Tabless Electrode Patent Deep Dive suggesting that
I had over or underestimated the impact of a tabless electrode on resistance and heat.
I picked a middle of the road estimate for heat generation rather than extremes. During
day to day use, the amount of heat generated would be less than I suggested. During racetrack
usage, the amount of heat generated would be greater than I suggested.
I didn’t consider my middle of the road estimate an error, but I could have explained
that the tabless design might have greater implications for vehicles like the Roadster
and Model S plaid. These vehicles might push the limits of the cell and pack architecture,
where heat and resistance begin to compound on each other. I didn’t wade into this topic
in the last video because it would be entering into territory where some heavy physics and/or
modelling would be required. Neither of which I have access to.
I appreciate all the great information and suggestions I get in the comments. The main
reason for starting this channel was to share and engage the community so we could all learn
more. I’ve certainly learned a lot from all of you and there have been a lot of great
questions that forced me to double check my information, improve my basic science knowledge,
and better understand batteries. The next video will be on Samsung’s self-titled
‘Breakthrough’ solid state battery research paper, which’ll be dropping at the end of
the coming week. The shout outs for new Patreon supporters will be called out in that video.
As always, I appreciate all of your support, and thanks for tuning in.