# What exactly does "IMR" mean?



## Battery Guy

Greetings Everyone,

I have seen a lot of threads recently on "IMR" lithium-ion cells. DFiorentino and myself have posted some test results recently (seen here and here, respectively). I also have seen a lot of comments recently that indicate a general misconception of what IMR cells actually are, especially with respect to rate capability and safety. The purpose of this thread is to clarify the issues surrounding the "IMR" designation for lithium-ion cells. I will try to keep the techno-jargin to a minimum, but please feel free to ask clarification questions if I lose you.

Unlike most battery chemistries whose name defines the chemistry of the anode and cathode, the term "lithium-ion" refers to an ever growing class of cell chemistries that utilize different materials to host lithium-ions in the charged and discharged state of the cell. Most lithium-ion cells use graphite or hard carbon as the negative electrode host material (typically referred to as the anode), but the selection of the positive electrode material (typically referred to as the cathode) is much more varied. The following three-letter designations for lithium-ion cell denote what cathode material is used in the cell:

ICR = LiCoO2 (also called LCO)
IMR = LiMn2O4 (also called LMO)
IFR = LiFePO4 (also called LFP)

_*If you take away one thing from this thread, remember this: The term "IMR" simply indicates that LiMn2O4 is a major component of the cathode. It does not necessarily indicate that a cell has exceptional rate capability or improved safety characteristics, properties often incorrectly associated with cells with the IMR designation.*_

You can stop reading now, but if you want that statement explained, please read on.

The selection of a particular cathode material generally has implications for the performance (capacity, energy density, rate capability, etc...), reliability (cycle life, calendar life) and safety characteristics. The impact of LiMn2O4 on these properties is discussed below.

*Performance*

The crystal structure of LiMn2O4 has three-dimensional tunnels that enable rapid diffusion of Li+ through LiMn2O4 particles, and therefore lithium-ion cells made with this material *can* have better theoretical drain rate capability. Conventional lithium-ion cells use LiCoO2 or variations of that material. Cells with LiCoO2 cathodes are typically designated with the term "ICR". The LiCoO2 type materials have a layered crystal structure that only enables 2D diffusion within the layers, so the overall Li+ diffusion rate is slower. Interestingly, LiFePO4, which is commonly used in high rate cells (think A123), has 1D diffusion of Li+ and an overall low diffusion rate. The only way to make LiFePO4 work is to make the particles very small (i.e. "nano") to reduce the distance that Li+ needs to diffuse. "Why not just make LiCoO2 or LiMn2O4 nano size to get even better rate capability?" I hear you ask. The only reason nano LiFePO4 works is that this material has a lower oxidizing potential (which is why the cell voltage is lower) and therefore it does not chemically react with the electrolyte. LiCoO2 and LiMn2O4 actually oxidize the electrolyte slowly with use, so using a nano-particulate cathode with these materials would greatly accelerate aging due to the higher surface area of the cathode, and the cells would have terrible cycle life.

Now back to LiMn2O4. This material has a lower crystalline density and therefore a lower inherent capacity (mAh/ml) than LiCoO2. If you do a direct replacement of LiCoO2 with LiMn2O4, the capacity of the cell will be reduced by ~15%. But here is the interesting thing: simply doing a direct replacement with LiMn2O4 will not significantly increase the rate capability of a cell. In order to get a real increase in rate capability, you need to design a cell with higher electrode surface area and thinner electrodes because Li+ diffusion in the cathode particles is not the only bottleneck to getting current out of the cell. Using thinner electrodes further reduces the capacity of the cell because you will have a higher fraction of "inert" materials like the separator and current collector. This is why IMR cells typically have ~40% lower capacity than their ICR cousins.

*Safety and Reliability*

An additional property of LiMn2O4 is that it cannot be overcharged. When a "true" (and I will explain why I put that in quotes later) IMR cell is charged beyond ~4.25 V, no additional capacity will go into the cell. The voltage will simply spike. This is exactly the same case for LiFePO4 cells. Cells that use LiCoO2 and its layered-metal oxide cousins can be overcharged, leading to significant safety issues when these cells are charged above their specified voltages. Cells with LiMn2O4 and LiFePO4 cathodes can be damaged by overcharging (oxidation of the electrolyte leads to increased internal resistance, loss of capacity and shorter cycle life), but overcharging to higher voltage does not make them less safe. This inability to overcharge, combined with the lower total energy density, is why lithium-ion cells with LiMn2O4 and LiFePO4 are generally considered to be "safer". 

The last property of LiMn2O4 that I will mention is that in its pure form it tends to have very poor cycle life. There has been a tremendous amount of research that has gone into improving the stability of LiMn2O4 to improve the cycle life of IMR cells, and this has produced cells with reasonably good long term performance. However, the easiest way to get great cycle life out of LiMn2O4 is to blend it with a separate cathode material that contains nickel. This includes the layered cathode materials Li(Nix,Cox,Mnx)O2 (aka NCM or 333), Li(NixCoyAlz)O2 (aka NCA) and Li(NixCoy)O2 (aka NCO). I won't bore you with the details, but it turns out that the oxides containing nickel acts to change the local chemistry around the LiMn2O4 particles and helps to improve stability. 

The end result is that most cells called "IMR" actually have a significant fraction of nickel-containing layered metal oxide as a co-cathode. This means that these cells can in fact be overcharged, thus minimizing the perceived safety advantage of the cell.

*Summary
*
Not all IMR cells are created equal. One cannot and should not make generalized statements about their performance, reliability or safety characteristics. 

I hope this helps dispel some of the mystery surrounding these cells.

Cheers,
BG


----------



## archimedes

Awesome post - thank you !

When I first saw the title, I was surprised that it was "in the form of a question" ... like Jeopardy!, I guess


----------



## Battery Guy

archimedes said:


> Awesome post - thank you !
> 
> When I first saw the title, I was surprised that it was "in the form of a question" ... like Jeopardy!, I guess



Hey archimedes,

Glad you liked the post. The title was designed to help folks find the post using the search function. I like the Jeopardy analogy!

Cheers,
BG


----------



## rlcrisp

So now the natural follow up question is how the different IMR cells which are relatively common in the cpf world compare to each other - maybe real world results that conclusions can be drawn from rather than dictation (no "X is better than Y"). Say maybe AW, Shao, etc. I know DFiorentino has done some of this work but it would be interesting to see an analysis from an expert to speculate as to how those cells embody the different possible IMR implementations. =)


----------



## Battery Guy

rlcrisp said:


> So now the natural follow up question is how the different IMR cells which are relatively common in the cpf world compare to each other - maybe real world results that conclusions can be drawn from rather than dictation (no "X is better than Y"). Say maybe AW, Shao, etc. I know DFiorentino has done some of this work but it would be interesting to see an analysis from an expert to speculate as to how those cells embody the different possible IMR implementations. =)



DFiorentino's tests are great, and provided the "spark" that I needed to get going with my lithium-ion cell tests.

I just placed an order for a complete set of the Shao cells. Glad I did actually, because I was not aware that Shao had an 17650 IMR cell. I sincerely hope that it holds up well to ~3.8 A discharge because I would love to use three of these in a small modded light with an 1185 bulb.

Cheers,
BG


----------



## Mr Happy

On the subject of high performing cells and hotwires, I have some K2 Energy LFP26650EV cells sitting at home waiting for me to do something with them. On the datasheet these are capable of continuous discharge currents up to 12 A (but recommended to keep to 3 A for maximum life). I've been thinking of a bulb configuration to use with them, with perhaps three cells in series for 9.6 V. Any ideas on this? It might be a squeeze to fit 3 in a Mag 3C body, but I imagine a 3D body would work. Then I wonder if the voltage would drive say an 1185 at full brightness, or if a different bulb would be a better match?


----------



## 45/70

I missed this thread earlier today, nice writeup, BG.

I have to say, to this day, every time I see "IMR", even here on the Forum, the first thing that comes to mind is "improved military rifle". This was one of the first smokeless powders developed by, I believe DuPont, in the late 1800's and still available and used by the military, as well as civilians in various forms today. After reloading handgun and rifle cartridges for over 35 years, I guess that's why it still comes to mind first.

Also, as pertains to Li-Ion cells, I thought the "I" meant lithium, the "M" manganese, and the "R" round. Or, is the "R" for rechargeable?

Dave


----------



## xul

Battery Guy said:


> _*properties often incorrectly associated with cells with the IMR designation.*_


If you say IMR or SLA or alkaline you can come with an 'average' performance but with a wide tolerance on this average value because it's not very specific. 
As you become more specific the tolerance band should narrow.

That's why some performance is shown as 'typical.' The definition for this word is up for grabs but the word 'average' or 'mean' has a clearly defined meaning.
Also, giving max or min values says nothing about the distribution of values for the units that are sold.


----------



## Norm

Added to Flashlight Electronics - Batteries Included - Threads of Interest
Norm


----------



## Battery Guy

45/70 said:


> Also, as pertains to Li-Ion cells, I thought the "I" meant lithium, the "M" manganese, and the "R" round. Or, is the "R" for rechargeable?



I believe that you are correct. For example, Molicel refers to their LiMn2O4 prismatic cells as "IMP", where the "P" stands for prismatic.


----------



## Battery Guy

Mr Happy said:


> On the subject of high performing cells and hotwires, I have some K2 Energy LFP26650EV cells sitting at home waiting for me to do something with them. On the datasheet these are capable of continuous discharge currents up to 12 A (but recommended to keep to 3 A for maximum life). I've been thinking of a bulb configuration to use with them, with perhaps three cells in series for 9.6 V. Any ideas on this? It might be a squeeze to fit 3 in a Mag 3C body, but I imagine a 3D body would work. Then I wonder if the voltage would drive say an 1185 at full brightness, or if a different bulb would be a better match?



While I have never been a huge fan of the LFP chemistry, I have to admit that the really flat discharge curve even at high currents is advantageous for hotwire setups.

Tough call on selecting a bulb that would match a 3S string of the K2 Energy LFP26650EV cells. Looking at LuxLuthor's charts, it seems that an ROP 3853H bulb might work well, although you might need to worry about  without a soft start. Looks like it could be borderline. If it does not instaflash, it would be a wonderful option for a 3D body. 

Let me know what you try. I am currently using Eneloops in a 9AA->3D holder for my Mag85. It would be nice to compare that configuration to a 3S string of K2 LFP26650 cells with a 3853H bulb. It would certainly save money on the battery holder and on bi-pin adapter.

Cheers,
BG


----------



## Mr Happy

Battery Guy said:


> Let me know what you try. I am currently using Eneloops in a 9AA->3D holder for my Mag85. It would be nice to compare that configuration to a 3S string of K2 LFP26650 cells with a 3853H bulb. It would certainly save money on the battery holder and on bi-pin adapter.


Hmmm. Time to stop thinking and start ordering some bits...


----------



## Mr Happy

Battery Guy said:


> While I have never been a huge fan of the LFP chemistry, I have to admit that the really flat discharge curve even at high currents is advantageous for hotwire setups.
> 
> Tough call on selecting a bulb that would match a 3S string of the K2 Energy LFP26650EV cells. Looking at LuxLuthor's charts, it seems that an ROP 3853H bulb might work well, although you might need to worry about  without a soft start. Looks like it could be borderline. If it does not instaflash, it would be a wonderful option for a 3D body.
> 
> Let me know what you try. I am currently using Eneloops in a 9AA->3D holder for my Mag85. It would be nice to compare that configuration to a 3S string of K2 LFP26650 cells with a 3853H bulb. It would certainly save money on the battery holder and on bi-pin adapter.
> 
> Cheers,
> BG



OK, a follow up to this question. I didn't try the configuration above, but I have put a 3854-H bulb with two of the LPF26650P cells in a Mag 2D with lots of resistance fixes. It works pretty well. The bulb gives a very white light with plenty of power, and while it won't win any prizes it seems like a very practical upgrade to an otherwise boring light.

I have a couple of LFP26650EV cells on charge to compare with the LFP26650P's. The EV's have a useful amount of extra capacity that should be useful where practicality is concerned.

As far as the details go I had to replace the tail spring with a smaller recessed one due to the length of the cells and I bypassed all the steel springs with soldered copper wire. I made a plastic sleeve that exactly matched the diameter of the cells to the bore of the light. Then I did the obvious replacement of the reflector and glass with heat resistant items.

If there's a complaint, the beam pattern is not round. It's a shame the bulb has a horizontal instead of a vertical filament. The result is that the reflector tends to project the filament shape and you get a kind of wide flat hot spot. On the other hand you just rotate the light in your hand until the hot spot is horizontal and you get a kind of "car headlight" beam pattern.

It's the wrong forum for this, but the light from incans is so much "nicer" than from LEDs...


----------



## ZNickey

I know this is bumping an old thread, but the information is great here and applies to a question which belongs here...

So now it is 2014...since this thread, Panasonic IMRs have seen a major reformulation (as have AWs and other users of those cells). How has cycle life improved? 

Likewise, the Panasonic ICR18650 has resulted in 18650s with ridiculous amounts of capacity...my AW 3400 mAh 18650 pushes my Fenix PD32UE far beyond what disposable lithium batteries can, which not too long ago was unheard of!

Additionally, I've historically used AW IMRs to power high-drain devices such as personal vaporizers which need a battery capable of taking the heavy draw/high amperage. When I started, ICRs sometimes could not handle the load, and even in cases that they could, the harsher conditions would result in a dramatically reduced service life. Since I started, the ability for ICRs to handle heavy draws has improved significantly (almost to the point of being able to use all ICRs which I would prefer due to the capacity boost). From my usage of the latest AW IMR cells, I've gotten the better part of 600 cycles on them before the service life was below 80%...and they are used in an application that is exceptionally harsh on batteries (drawing major amps and quickly draining the battery as in recharge it at least once a day and sometimes more.)




*So how do IMRs, ICRs, and IFRs stacking up today with all of the changes? Should new information be included here? 

This is a very helpful thread!!!*


----------



## StorminMatt

Battery Guy said:


> While I have never been a huge fan of the LFP chemistry, I have to admit that the really flat discharge curve even at high currents is advantageous for hotwire setups.



Speaking of that awesome discharge curve you get from LiFePO4, I have always wondered a couple of things. First of all, given that LiFePO4 operates in the same manner as other Li-Ion batteries, what is it about LiFePO4 that gives it that nice, flat curve? Also, might it be possible to make changes to 3.7V chemistries to give a similar flat discharge curve (albeit at a higher voltage)?


----------



## magellan

I only just saw this. Thanks BG, that was great. I've copied it into my permanent notes on batteries and flashlight info. Are you an electrochemist or battery engineer by any chance?


----------



## ps56k

great info - just stumbled across it as our son bought some IMR 10440's for his ITP EOS flashlight that I got him years ago, 
and I had no idea what he was talking about .... battery wise.


----------



## gmac

Thanks, great info. I have not seen these cell types listed with any kind of protected circuit, is that not required? Does anyone know whether the Pila Charger can handle these cell types?


----------



## david57strat

Some great info, here. I have to get ready for work, but I'll look forward to reading this, when I get home!


----------



## SubLGT

Isn't it time to let the IMR and ICR terminology fade away into oblivion? It simply does not provide that much information, IMO. Or it provides misleading information.

If IMR = LiMn2O4
If ICR = LiCoO2

Then to what group does the Panasonic NCR18650B (LiNiCoAlO2) belong? It is commonly called an ICR battery, but it is actually a "hybrid". Even calling a battery a hybrid does not provide much information.


----------



## WarRaven

*Re: What exactly does &quot;IMR&quot; mean?*

That's NCR isn't it, Nickel cobalt rechargeable or round?
Aka hybrid as I know it.


----------



## ChrisGarrett

SubLGT said:


> Isn't it time to let the IMR and ICR terminology fade away into oblivion? It simply does not provide that much information, IMO. Or it provides misleading information.
> 
> If IMR = LiMn2O4
> If ICR = LiCoO2
> 
> Then to what group does the Panasonic NCR18650B (LiNiCoAlO2) belong? It is commonly called an ICR battery, but it is actually a "hybrid". Even calling a battery a hybrid does not provide much information.



I think that the last true c​obalt dioxide based cell from Panasonic was their 3100mAh NCR-A, so while I've seen 'INR/inr' used and I believe that there are some other 'Ixx' designators in the marketplace, it's probably best for us to just identify the base cell inside, if we can and even those specific model numbers seem to be turning over after a few months, so saying I have a pair of LG HE2s, might only be helpful within a short period of time, because newer models are coming out so frequently, that we're forgetting what we used just 3 months back, lol.

Chris


----------



## LuxLuthor

That was indeed a superb post that Battery Guy made in 2001... and it is also true that the changes in pursuit of better safety/performance/longevity/etc. are changing the components that take it way beyond the early days. You have to do your due diligence to be sure of what you are getting, who is actually making it (build quality & reputation), etc. before buying in more recent times.


----------



## magellan

45/70 said:


> I missed this thread earlier today, nice writeup, BG.
> 
> I have to say, to this day, every time I see "IMR", even here on the Forum, the first thing that comes to mind is "improved military rifle". This was one of the first smokeless powders developed by, I believe DuPont, in the late 1800's and still available and used by the military, as well as civilians in various forms today. After reloading handgun and rifle cartridges for over 35 years, I guess that's why it still comes to mind first.
> 
> Also, as pertains to Li-Ion cells, I thought the "I" meant lithium, the "M" manganese, and the "R" round. Or, is the "R" for rechargeable?
> 
> Dave



Ha-ha! I had forgotten about the gun powder history. Good point.

I guess that was one of the first true "gun cotton" or nitrocellulose based powders.


----------



## fivemega

LuxLuthor said:


> That was indeed a superb post that Battery Guy made in 2001....


*I think you meant 2011.
There was no IMR readily available for flashaholics back in 2001*


----------



## kreisl

Here is some more information :
http://batterybro.com/blogs/18650-w.../18880255-battery-chemistry-finally-explained

Very confusing. 
So in a direct drive flashlight the IMR battery would produce the highest current draw? Will it harm the flashlight?


----------



## chillinn

SubLGT said:


> If IMR = LiMn2O4
> If ICR = LiCoO2
> 
> Then to what group does the Panasonic NCR18650B (LiNiCoAlO2) belong? It is commonly called an ICR battery, but it is actually a "hybrid". Even calling a battery a hybrid does not provide much information.





kreisl said:


> Here is some more information :
> http://batterybro.com/blogs/18650-w.../18880255-battery-chemistry-finally-explained



I think this is worth stealing from that link and reposting here to underscore the nomenclature confusability:


----------



## man_o'_sand

Bookmarked. And thanks for this informative thread.

Great forum here.


----------



## ChrisGarrett

man_o'_sand said:


> Bookmarked. And thanks for this informative thread.
> 
> Great forum here.



ICR, or lithium cobalt 18650s are becoming rarer, so the old ICR, IMR and IFR abbreviations are somewhat archaic and well...just using the term 'hybrid' is probably just as good.

Somebody corrected me once and stated that the last pure ICR/cobalt dioxide (?) cell made was the Panasonic NCR18650 2900mAh cell, from more than a few years back.

They have a grey wrapper on them.

Anyhow...

Welcome.

Chris


----------



## man_o'_sand

Thanks for the updated info, Chris.

And thanks for the greeting.


----------



## CelticCross74

okay I love this thread it taught me a lot. Here is one that has me scratching my head. The LED Lenser M7RX uses an INR 2200mah flat top 18650. I have searched and searched and do not know what INR stands for and if the LED Lenser cell is protected or not. Was going to buy the light but do not want to be stuck with some low capacity mystery 2200mah cell. Sorry if this is basic info everyone else probably knows...I was hoping I could buy the light and just switch out the crappy low capacity cell for an unprotected GA?


----------



## ChrisGarrett

CelticCross74 said:


> okay I love this thread it taught me a lot. Here is one that has me scratching my head. The LED Lenser M7RX uses an INR 2200mah flat top 18650. I have searched and searched and do not know what INR stands for and if the LED Lenser cell is protected or not. Was going to buy the light but do not want to be stuck with some low capacity mystery 2200mah cell. Sorry if this is basic info everyone else probably knows...I was hoping I could buy the light and just switch out the crappy low capacity cell for an unprotected GA?



I=Lithium

N=Nickel

R=Round/cylindrical

It's one of the newer chemistries, where ICR/IMR/IFR don't really describe what's inside.

There are cells using aluminum, which are also hybrids.

Whether somebody throws a protection circuit onto one, or not, I can't say.

https://batterybro.com/blogs/18650-.../18880255-battery-chemistry-finally-explained

That link gives you an idea, but isn't 100% accurate in listing specific cells within a category.

Chris


----------



## CelticCross74

thanks for the link Chris cleared a few things up for me. Now to find a source of higher capacity INR cells...


----------



## ven

LG and Samsung CC is mainly what i use, 30Q at 3000mah are a good balance for me. Unless your going to take your cells right down past 3v(unlikely) and tend to top them off after use, 3000 or 3500 mah is no massive deal imho(that is my opinion though).

IMR seem to be replaced with more INR from what i can find when looking for batteries, so i kind of see it as an advancement, A rating and mah which is more than enough for most lights we have. When it comes to mods and sub ohm, well thats a different matter and the cells are really used............


----------



## CelticCross74

glad it didnt turn out to mean ISIS Motivational Reading lol.....thanks guys for helping clear this up for me some. Was considering getting the LED Lenser M7RX but it comes with a crap 2200mah INR cell. No luck finding INR cells. Oh well...the LED Lenser is really expensive anyways...


----------



## ven

30Q are an INR to name one .Most of them now with higher A ratings seem to be INR rather than IMR from my findings and purchases .


----------



## CelticCross74

interesting ven I did not know that will take a look


----------



## ven

CelticCross74 said:


> interesting ven I did not know that will take a look




Not it sure if you can pinch expand on phone(can see it on a computer screen) At the start of the 18650 part on the cells


----------



## Redd1717

Great knowledge here; I am still digesting and relearn some basic electrical knowledge.

I am experimenting with Nerf flywheel blasters. I want to stay as close to stock as possible, up voltage and amperage, and still not burn out the stock motors. No, I don't yet really know the specifications or limitations of stock Nerf flywheel motors. I do know (from others' mistakes) that 4 'trustfire' batteries running the stock motors for a significant amount of time (say....more than 4 minutes under continuous load can burn out the motors. AND, yes, I am considering the upgrades for the wiring and switch(es).

Is there Lithium-ion battery that would best fit my above needs/wants or are my expectations to far out in left field?


----------



## Bullzeyebill

Redd1717 said:


> I am experimenting with Nerf flywheel blasters.



Your post if off topic for this thread. You can start your own thread with that topic. Go to the Forums index and find the forum that best suits your needs. 

Bill


----------



## StorminMatt

ChrisGarrett said:


> ICR, or lithium cobalt 18650s are becoming rarer, so the old ICR, IMR and IFR abbreviations are somewhat archaic and well...just using the term 'hybrid' is probably just as good.



Good point. With the exception of IFR (which is still a rather distinct chemistry), these labels really don't mean much. For the most part, Li-Ion batteries being sold today are hybrids of one form or another. 'IMR' typically just refers to any 3.7V cell which can produce more current. But these are generally not true IMR cells. Rather, they are hybrid cells.


----------



## Gauss163

Here is another helpful table, from TI's Introduction to Battery Management slides.


----------



## CelticCross74

hey this awesome thread is back! To add to the mix I just got a pair of Orbtronic 3000mah 20 amp cells that they call H-IMR. Soooo...all I know is they outlast my VCT5's in my vape mod...


----------



## RadioBlood

I have heard lots of flimsy info when it comes to batteries in the evape industry, I most build and use subohm coils in my atomizers, and the units I use take 2 18650s. My question is, which batteries are safest when vaping at 100-200V and which batteries will actually be able to produce that with the least drop in voltage and amperage?


----------



## SubLGT

RadioBlood said:


> ...which batteries are safest when vaping at 100-200V and which batteries will actually be able to produce that with the least drop in voltage and amperage?



You will find your answer here, I think: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/forums/batteries-and-chargers.828/

https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/


----------



## Swedpat

Batteries are really a "jungle". So many things to take in consider, so many options. Some sites tell that IMR cells are safe. And here I read that IMR doesn't necessarily means it's safe...


----------



## SubLGT

Here is an informative video titled "IMR, INR, and ICR Are Not Battery Chemistries!"

https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/t...r-and-icr-are-not-battery-chemistries.852603/


----------

