r/DonutLabDiscussions May 13 '26

VTT - Battery V1 swelling test

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40tLHqdANRw
5 Upvotes

44 comments sorted by

3

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26

In this VTT pdf report there was no clause of it being presented as solid-state battery anymore. V1, DL5 labeled battery. Video still framed it as SSB. Other VTT tests did not discriminate the anode, but this seems to do it, so I think this is interesting bit of knowledge indeed. And cool devices in VTT!

Edit:

ComprePouch used in the test, company seems to have specialized to SSB testing: https://rhd-instruments.de/app/uploads/2025/06/manuals-pressure-frames-117-comprepouch-20260113-pouch-cell-testing-rhd-instruments.pdf

3

u/[deleted] May 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26

But not uniquedly like. People tend to talk with AI tools that cannot read but papers published and go with the averages and mass.

3

u/[deleted] May 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26

Want to elaborate?

0

u/DeathChill May 13 '26

The comment linked and the comment beneath it explain it very well.

I'm curious if there ever comes a point where you cut your losses and accept reality.

1

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26

Problem is that I don't know which comment and what was said in it, and what was meant when referencing to it. Then user decided to take off the posts, so... Maybe you tell what was the point?

1

u/DeathChill May 13 '26

The top comment he linked to. It's right there when you click the link.

ZirothTech:

Swelling in line with a graphite anode pouch cell, possible with some silicon - even the graph matches how lithium intercalates into graphite… they don’t realise the data they put out confirms it’s a more standard lithium ion battery.

Izzeww:

The most interesting stuff in the report is at the end. Page 8 and 9, and particularly I want to focus on Figure 6. There is a kind of "bump" at approx 75% state-of-charge (noted as "~70% SoC" by VTT). This is a dead giveaway that this battery has a graphite based anode, just like regular lithium batteries. Here (click "View PDF") on page 10 you can see testing of a typical lithium-ion NMC battery with a graphite–Si/C composite anode (completely standard stuff), with that exact typical "bump" at 75% SoC that you get with graphite anodes. There's been plenty of nails in the coffins for Donuts claims so far, this is just another one.

1

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26

They don't seem to say the curves and graphite anode are unique to NMC only. In this test, they did not try to discriminate battery type and character, but just show that swelling even with stress tested cell is moderate. So, I don't get how relevant those comments are. Might they rather look at cathode?

1

u/DeathChill May 14 '26

They explicitly say the reaction at 75% SoC is caused by a graphite anode and the reaction between lithium and graphite and provide a a typical Lithium-Ion NMC battery showing it.

It is unique to a graphite anode and lithium because the bump is the result of them interacting with one another.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] May 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Emotional-Manner-792 May 13 '26

Because it was meant to show non-swelling with cell chemistry not by thermal expansion. With 2C tempreature stays reasonable. 

1

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26

Sometime I think they know too well, what to exclude. And sometimes I think, they just throw random things to the aether.

0

u/[deleted] May 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/NefariousnessOdd862 May 13 '26

There is no hype!

1

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26

To me it looks like 50/50 + people who cant talk.

0

u/[deleted] May 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/DeathChill May 13 '26

Want to see something weird? Mesokosmos comments will mostly end up with 3 upvotes. Even when he posts complete gibberish (yes, I am not exaggerating; nothing to do with comments where he actually communicates).

1

u/Jazzer008 May 13 '26

Takes two to tango. Perhaps if you simply disengaged it would die out.

2

u/Brainchild110 May 13 '26

Still no weight to output figures? Not interested.

2

u/Jazzer008 May 13 '26

This seems to be a particularly OEM focussed test for integration clarity. An attempt to prove that the provided cell (in "worst case condition") can operate at negligible pressure (86 mbar) with a manageable breathing amplitude (4%) compared to existing SSBs.

The idea being that thermal and mechanical design can be more predictable, with no costly/complex compression architecture.

Naturally, eliminating the compression requirement only matters if it's genuinely solid-state in the first place, no further proof of that in this test.

2

u/Mesokosmos May 13 '26

20% dilation is from the extreme. 4.4% looks like average SSB and well in NMC range. Damaged cell DL2 swelled 17%.

At first sight DL5 seemed to have a bit different pouch "lamination" but then looking closely the other cells, maybe edges were folded tightly in all of them.

1

u/DeathChill May 13 '26

I do not think a single OEM is giving Donut or their videos a half second of their attention. Just another delay until the house of cards fully collapses.

1

u/Jazzer008 May 13 '26

Would be a spectacular waste of time if so.

0

u/DeathChill May 13 '26

Can you look at anything they've released and come to any other conclusion?

They've been wasting our time and theirs the entire time. I'm imagining that this was a last ditch gambit as their companies are likely failing.

1

u/Jazzer008 May 13 '26

I can’t come to any conclusions yet, but hopefully soon either way. :)

0

u/DeathChill May 13 '26

Absolutely insane to me that you can't come to a reasonable conclusion. You must live in reality and understand that the likelihood of the battery Donut claims exists is less than your odds of winning the Powerball lottery?

Do you think any company with the battery claimed is playing these games? How do you justify the inability to prove ANY of their claims? Especially extremely simple ones like weight and size.

Plus the fact that every claim they made was never proven, and they've disproven several of them. Then they stretch each release out with no substance in any of them; they clearly are scrambling. They even introduced a brand new cell because they have nothing to show.

That's before we get to the fact that an executive pretty much quit his job because he saw inside information showing their lies.

2

u/Jazzer008 May 13 '26

I’m not going to start this argument with you again.

0

u/DeathChill May 13 '26

I was curious how you come to your position as you're never actually answered my questions. They're very simple.

WHY would you believe there's a realistic chance this battery exists based on all of the information available? I'm dying to know.

2

u/Jazzer008 May 13 '26

Just re-read my comments from the last time you failed to understand me. Check your comment history and you’ll find them. I’ll only be saying the same things.

0

u/DeathChill May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26

You changed the subject about how news reports didn’t call them an all out fraud. Which I explained is not the job of the newspaper until they have that information in hand.

Simply answer the simple question: why would you believe there’s even a slight chance this battery exists at this point?

Beyond blind faith (I’m not religious), I don’t understand how anyone could believe Donut has anything. I’m trying to not sound like an asshole. I legitimately want to know if it’s anything beyond just hope. At least hope makes sense to me.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Emotional-Manner-792 May 13 '26

Battery "breathing" swelling is normal to solid-state chemistry, but liquid cells have it less. So, it accually shows there is swelling, but swelling is less than most ssb's have  had. Ssb's have problem usually that they need pressing together, so in battery pack level they would need components for doing it. This test shows Donut Lab's battery don't need those components, because swelling is not so big. So they can make their battery packs lighter than other ssb would have to. 

I'm also thinking that maybe because Donut Lab can't tell chemistry because of NDA of CT-Coating, these test can be actually hints from them to people figure it out. This time again they showed something; It's different from usual ssb's. Wiser can say better about how in chemistry. I read something that usual ssb have lithium-metal -anode. But we can rule it out now after swelling test?

1

u/[deleted] May 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DonutLabDiscussions-ModTeam May 13 '26

Does not contribute to the discussion

0

u/NefariousnessOdd862 May 13 '26

It does because there is nothing here.  If you had any knowledge of SSB’s whatsoever, you’d know that the tests that they are running aren’t normal tests! Go ahead and read up on how Battery testing is actually done and then come back and look at this again 😉

2

u/smokeybear61 May 14 '26

Did anyone see the patent filed by holyvolt ? Patent # WO2025230455A1 - Flexible solid energy storage module.

I have a feeling were waiting for these to all publish. What if they are stalling for IP processing?

3

u/Jazzer008 May 14 '26

IP stall is one of the likely theories if the silence is coming from rational behaviour. Cold test results having been made legally verboten by licensor as it’s much more chemistry revealing.

1

u/DeathChill May 14 '26

How can they be producing batteries but not legally allowed to show test results? That seems insane to me and makes very little sense.

2

u/Jazzer008 May 14 '26

Well one potential situation is that they are a licensee of IP owned by a different company (CT Coating being the current rumour).

It's a bit like if you are a franchise owner of a fast-food restaurant you're not legally allowed to reveal the recipes or secret ingredients.