This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

BQ34Z100-G1: Difficulties getting the Chem ID tool to work

Part Number: BQ34Z100-G1

Bryan Kahler,

I have tried to post to the previous thread that you provided the following advice but that thread seems closed and does not seem to accept new comments.

Please remove the spaces from your config.txt file so it is formatted like this:

ProcessingType=2
NumCellSeries=6
ElapsedTimeColumn=0
VoltageColumn=1
CurrentColumn=2
TemperatureColumn=3

I tired the advice and it did not help.  I did find while reviewing my data, that I parsed it incorrectly and the NumCellSeries was incorrect.  My parsing currently divides the voltage by 4 cells for the LiFePo4 battery I am using and so the NumCellSeries=1 when the voltage is scaled that way. 

  • 6787.LiFePo4NoSpace.zipI am attaching a copy of the ZIP file I submitted last to the tool.

  • Hi Richard,

    Thank you for the update. Still looking into this issue. Due to the holiday I will have to update the post next week. Please expect an update by EOD Tuesday.

    Sincerely,
    Bryan Kahler
  • Hi Richard,

    Due to the volume from the holiday, the team is still working on that response. Testing the logs internally. Will have an update by EOD Thursday.

    Sincerely,
    Bryan Kahler
  • Hopefully you can figure out what it does not like.  Since the holidays, I have submitted a few additional efforts to see if I can get an answer from the tool.  If you have an example file for a LiFePO4/LFP/Lithium-Iron Phosphate batttery that the tool likes that I could look at to see if stupid stuff like spaces are causing the tool to crash. I could perhaps submit the example file and verify the tool provides results and then I could try to copy the format if it varies from what I submit?

    The instructions say that using the BQ34Z100-G1 battery monitoring chip and the battery management suite is accurate enough to use in battery characterization, so I have used that in the battery chip to collect previous data.  I have switched over to using lab equipment to measure the data instead and my recent submissions this week using lab measurement equipment have also not resulted in getting a chemistry file from the tool.  The instructions say the charging profile should use a constant current and voltage or the manufacturer's charging recommendation.  The instructions say "The initial charging portion is not required. The charging must be performed shortly before the relaxation period. Relaxation data is required before and after the discharge." So in theory using a constant current and voltage instead of the manufacturer's charging recommendation should not change the results.  

    However I am currently re characterizing the battery using lab equipment and a full charge to discharge cycle with the test automated to match TI's recommended 5 values.  I included the section of the instructions for the LiFePO4/LFP/Lithium-Iron Phosphate battery below.  I expect that effort will be completed by start of business Thursday morning.  That is likely the most precisely done effort and I can do to obtain the data.  Since I have not used the Battery Management Suite to collect the data or package it in a ZIP file, I wonder if there is some peculiarity of the files the battery management suite generates that is causing the tool to not accept the file when I submit it.  It would be helpful as mentioned to get an example that the tool will accept so I can try to copy its format to try to get a successful result.

    3.2 LiFePO4/LFP/Lithium-Iron Phosphate The required test consists of the following steps: 1. Test is performed at room temperature. If the cell was at a different temperature before, let the cell relax for two hours at room temperature prior to the test. 2. Charge using CC or CV charging to full using taper current. (For example C/100.) Use nominal CC charge rate and CV voltage. If another charging method is specified by the cell maker, use that method. 3. Let the battery relax for five hours to reach full equilibrium open circuit voltage (OCV). 4. Discharge the battery at C/10 rate until the minimal voltage (as specified by the cell manufacturer) is reached. 5. Let the battery relax for five hours to reach full equilibrium OCV. The result is shown in Figure 1.

  • Brian, I was wondering if you have spent time trying to resolve the issue I am experiencing with the chem tool?

  • Richard,

    if you are not receiving any answer, it is most likely due to your e-mail system rejecting zip attachments.

    Try to send it from a different e-mail address. Even if tool fails, it always sends at least an error message.

     

    I was able to get an report from the file you submitted (sent to you directly).

    It indicates that the cell does not have a chem ID that can be used directly, and new ID needs to be released.

     

    The only thing that could be improved from the data is that series resistance to the cell can be reduced

    by either using shorter wires or using 4-terminal Kelvin connection for voltage measurement directly at

    the cell, because IR drop across the cell looks very high for C/10 rate discharge.

      

    Typical expected drop is 50-100mV. Much higher drop observed in your case (from 3.6 to 3.2V) indicates unusually high serial resistance.

    This will cause an increased error in DOD estimation and could result in absence of good selection when it could be obtained if resistance

    is normal. 

    Regards,
    Yevgen

  • I did contact the IT department where I work and some recent emails from TI with ZIPs did get blocked.  Others may have been deleted by the system that I submitted longer ago.  I resubmitted an older data set that did not seem to have the IR drop that I see when using lab test equipment.  I am trying to resolve the discrepancy.

  • Hi Richard,

    Thank you for the update.

    Please let us know if any issues persist.

    Sincerely,
    Bryan Kahler
  • Bryan,

    I did get chemistry reports for both configurations.  The web page where reports are submitted might be updated to mention the reports are provided in ZIP files and that if a result is not obtained, that the email system might be causing that.  That cost a lot of time a lot of time.  I am marking this case closed since that was the issue I was having.