# Lithium plating during calendar aging in pybamm model

**URL:** <https://pybamm.discourse.group/t/lithium-plating-during-calendar-aging-in-pybamm-model/453>\
**Category:** PyBaMM Q&A\
**Created:** [7 March 2026 04:19 UTC](https://pybamm.discourse.group/t/lithium-plating-during-calendar-aging-in-pybamm-model/453 "2026-03-07T04:19:28Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thiyaga](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/pybamm.discourse.group/thiyaga/32/37_2.png) [@Thiyaga](https://pybamm.discourse.group/u/Thiyaga)\
**Post date:** [7 March 2026 04:19 UTC](https://pybamm.discourse.group/t/lithium-plating-during-calendar-aging-in-pybamm-model/453/1 "2026-03-07T04:19:28Z")

</div>

team pybamm,

I am simulating **calendar aging** in PyBaMM for a cell stored at **95% SOC** and **40 °C**.

my model setup is as follows,

model = pybamm.lithium\_ion.DFN(  
{  
“cell geometry”: “arbitrary”,  
“thermal”: “lumped”,  
“SEI”: “solvent-diffusion limited”,  
“SEI porosity change”: “true”,

“lithium plating”: “partially reversible”,  
“lithium plating porosity change”: “true”, # alias for “SEI porosity change”  
“loss of active material”:“stress-driven” ,  
“calculate discharge energy”:“true”  
},  
)

solver = pybamm.IDAKLUSolver()

When lithium plating is enabled in the model, I see a noticeable amount of plated lithium loss. I was expecting plating to be negligible during calendar aging modeling, since there is no applied charging current.

- Is this expected behavior in PyBaMM, from literature i understand li plating loss to be negligible during storage.

- Should i switch off plating sub model explicitly for calendar aging modeling (in the pybamm git-hub calendar aging example problem only SEI sub model is activated)

thanks and regards

Thiyaga

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![priya6ik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac91a4/32.png) [@priya6ik](https://pybamm.discourse.group/u/priya6ik)\
**Post date:** [3 April 2026 07:23 UTC](https://pybamm.discourse.group/t/lithium-plating-during-calendar-aging-in-pybamm-model/453/2 "2026-04-03T07:23:45Z")

</div>

Hi Thiyaga,

During calender aging it is recommended only to use these options:

“SEI”: “solvent-diffusion limited”,  
“SEI porosity change”: “true”

and turn of all other options such as Lithium plating, LAM, or cracking. I noticed that with these other options in the model, there is quite a lot of unrealistic capacity lost in other mechanisms like cracking which should not really happen in calendar aging when there is no current.

Hope this helps,

Priya

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thiyaga](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/pybamm.discourse.group/thiyaga/32/37_2.png) [@Thiyaga](https://pybamm.discourse.group/u/Thiyaga)\
**Post date:** [3 April 2026 13:02 UTC](https://pybamm.discourse.group/t/lithium-plating-during-calendar-aging-in-pybamm-model/453/3 "2026-04-03T13:02:04Z")

</div>

Hi @priya6ik ,

thanks for the kind note. yes, activating only SEI helps.

Thiyaga