Tips & Tricks for a successful HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06 proposal
Opening
03 December 2026
Deadline
Keywords
battery cell manufacturing
lithium-ion batteries
IA
sodium-ion batteries
BATT4EU Partnership
TRL 6-7
pilot production line
Safe & Sustainable by Design
Your microfluidic SME partner for Horizon Europe
We take care of microfluidic engineering, work on valorization and optimize the proposal with you
HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06: Sustainable and competitive cell production techniques for Lithium-ion and Sodium-ion batteries (BATT4EU Partnership)
How does a battery’s first charge shape its later performance?
During the formation of a graphite-based lithium-ion cell, the first controlled charging steps create a solid electrolyte interphase, a thin reaction layer on the negative electrode that influences ion transport and subsequent cell behaviour. The charging protocol must also limit damaging side reactions such as lithium plating. In these cells, Ober and Manthiram showed that the tolerable formation rate depends on electrode loading and electrolyte composition. [1] This makes faster formation a challenge involving both materials and processing for HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06, which seeks shorter formation and ageing times alongside lower energy use and maintained or improved cell quality.
Download the MIC Horizon Europe 2026/2027 Calls Calendar:
Discover more!
Administrative facts: what do we know about the HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06 call?
Which call is it, and when is the opening and the deadline?
- Call name: BATTERIES and ENERGY
- Call identifier: HORIZON-CL5-2027-02
- Destination: D2 – Cross-sectoral solutions for the climate transition
- Topic: HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06
- Opening date: 03 December 2026
- Deadline: 31 March 2027 at 17:00 Brussels time
- Type of action: Innovation Actions (IA)
What about the budget and estimated size of the project?
- Total indicative budget for the topic: EUR 37.80 million
- Number of projects expected to be funded: 2
- Expected EU contribution per project: EUR 18.90 million
What are the key eligibility and evaluation conditions?
- General eligibility: standard Horizon Europe conditions (General Annex B)
- TRL target: activities expected to reach TRL 6-7 by end of project
- JRC: may participate as consortium member with zero funding, or as associated partner; JRC does not take part in proposal preparation
- Satellite data: if used, must rely on Copernicus and/or Galileo/EGNOS
- Exploitation plans required: must include scalability, commercialisation strategy, and preliminary business plan; the Innovation Fund is specifically mentioned as a potential follow-on funding source
- BATT4EU reporting: projects must contribute to BATT4EU Partnership KPI monitoring
Scientific range: what does the Commission expect from the HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06 grant?
What outcomes are expected?
The Commission prefers pilot manufacturing lines that are not only documented but also actually running. By the end of the project, you should have demonstrated flexible production equipment capable of switching between sodium-ion and lithium-ion chemistries, with CAPEX and OPEX significantly lowered compared to existing benchmarks and with undeniable evidence of improved cell quality. Having a credible exploitation strategy focused on industrial scale-up is not optional.
What is within scope?
- Modular and adaptable machinery that may be rearranged and added to production pilot lines
- Modern inline quality monitoring combined with sophisticated electrode production techniques
- Improving dry-room cell assembly procedures to increase output and use less energy.
- Quick and low-energy techniques for cell development and aging
- Digitizing production lines (quality testing, inline defect detection)
- In-depth life-cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic analysis (TEA)
- Using the Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) framework as a guide
What are the specifically proposed research directions?
The call makes its desires quite clear. There will undoubtedly be new mixing systems for electrode production. Setting up a dry room is a completely distinct focus that, in our opinion, represents the energy waste in EU production. Another term is “cell formation shortening,” most likely because the formation and aging cycles are the primary causes of the throughput slowing. Furthermore, the decision to fully digitize the production line shows that the Commission views real-time quality monitoring as a sign of competitiveness and a means of cutting costs.
- Manufacturing electrodes using innovative mixing techniques
- Redesigning dry-room assembly equipment to significantly lower energy use and cross-contamination
- Using accelerated cell formation and aging treatments
- Automated flaw detection and in-line quality testing systems
- Flexibility in multiple chemistries (Na-ion and Li-ion on the same pilot line)
Scientific strategy: how can you enhance your chances of being funded through HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06?
What scientific choices matter most?
- Tag the progress you made with the help of a well-known benchmark that defines the frontier of technology. The requirement clearly states this. Select a trustworthy reference point and demonstrate how your method outperforms it based on the metrics of cost, energy, and quality.
- It is necessary to rethink both chemistries. A submission that engages only lithium-ion will be less competitive. The whole rationale behind the flexible machinery trick is that the same line can accommodate sodium-ion chemicals. So, in your technical argument, you have to prove that this is your capability, not just your theory.
- Turn your TEA and LCA into the most important arguments for your case. Do not use them just as a supplement. The Commission expects that techno-economic and lifecycle assessments are not only validatory tools, serving to back up post-facto design choices, but also that they actually lead to these choices.
- Show genuine pilot-scale enthusiasm. Reaching TRL 6-7 is the goal here. This call is obviously for something beyond a lab proof-of-concept. Make a clear connection to the Innovation Fund. It is identified as a subsequent finance route in the work program.
- The veracity of your exploitation strategy is significantly increased by proving that you are aware of the path to this source.
- Put SSbD into practice right away. Safe and Sustainable by Design is more than just a checkbox. Instead of focusing only on the reporting, include it in your design strategy
Consortium & proposal-writing plan: what works best with this type of call?
- Eight to twelve partners, perhaps a few more if the industrial footprint is quite broad. You need partners with significant industrial capabilities because the IA typically invests about EUR 19 million each project.
- Manufacturers of equipment ought to be important members of your consortium. The partners you choose should be players who construct manufacturing machines, not just those who use them, because the topic is about technology, not just processes.
- One or several automakers or battery cell producers. Without an end user to verify battery cell quality at the pack level, an exploitation scenario would be somewhat weak.
- Given the need for inline quality control, a partner in digitalization or industrial AI truly adds something additional. Make this role a full-fledged part rather than an afterthought.
- You may include a state-of-the-art research center that specializes in process automation or quality monitoring if some of your partners are from business. These professionals typically own the precise proprietary tools that distinguish a proposal.
- When writing, avoid describing the manufacturing problem in your abstract. Rather, start by outlining your consortium’s actual capabilities and scale. A pilot line is what reviewers want to see.
- Within the first three pages, give them something concrete. This section about exploitation is undoubtedly not standard text. It will be read by the judges. Be modest about the timescale, specify the follow-on vehicle (Innovation Fund), and outline the practical procedures to scaling up.
How should flexible battery manufacturing be validated?
Validate chemistry changeovers and finished-cell quality together. The work programme expects modular, reconfigurable machinery for pilot lines accommodating different lithium-ion chemistries and compositions, as well as sodium-ion chemistries. Demonstration should address cross-contamination and the handling of sensitive materials.
A useful test plan would include actual changeovers, with predefined cleaning, material-handling and product-acceptance criteria. Record changeover time, material losses and contamination measurements, then assess whether cells produced after the transition meet the selected specifications.
Use a reference process for each evaluated cell design and chemistry. Compare energy use per accepted cell, throughput, reject rates and finished-cell performance under stated conditions. Report cell size and capacity so equipment improvements can be distinguished from differences between products.
For faster formation and ageing, assess subsequent cycling behaviour and relevant safety characteristics alongside processing time and energy consumption. For dry-room improvements, measure environmental conditions and cell quality as well as infrastructure energy use.
Use the pilot measurements in the techno-economic assessment and life-cycle analysis. Keep measured results separate from factory-scale projections, and state assumptions about production volume, yield, equipment utilisation and energy supply.
The MIC already brings its expertise in microfluidics to Horizon Europe:
H2020-NMBP-TR-IND-2020
Microfluidic platform to study the interaction of cancer cells with lymphatic tissue
H2020-LC-GD-2020-3
Toxicology assessment of pharmaceutical products on a placenta-on-chip model
About the author
Céleste Chidiac, PhD
Scientific writer and digital marketing specialist
Céleste Chidiac holds a doctorate in neuroscience and molecular biology from the University of Strasbourg. Since joining the Microfluidics Innovation Center in 2023, she has combined scientific writing with website management. For MIC’s Horizon Europe topic pages, she draws on her research background to explain scientific challenges and clarify funding priorities. Her writing helps prospective applicants understand each topic’s scope, expected outcomes and research directions.
FAQ - HORIZON-CL5-2027-02-D2-06
Technical questions about electrode processing, chemistry changeovers and evidence of battery cell quality.
Why can a fast formation protocol fail when electrode loading increases?
Higher loading can make ion transport through the electrode more limiting. In graphite-based lithium-ion cells, Ober and Manthiram found that a formation rate tolerated at lower loading caused substantial capacity loss at higher loading with a conventional electrolyte. [1] Transfer therefore requires tests using the intended electrode structure and electrolyte.
Why can identical slurry compositions produce different electrode properties?
Mixing history can change how conductive particles and binders are distributed. Zankowski and colleagues changed the initial binder concentration during mixing while retaining the final composition of graphite electrodes. They observed reduced carbon–binder agglomeration and lower electronic resistivity. [2] A composition specification alone therefore does not establish an equivalent electrode structure.
Why can faster electrode drying affect adhesion and ion transport?
Drying can redistribute binder through the electrode thickness. In graphite electrodes containing carboxymethyl cellulose and styrene-butadiene rubber binders, Zankowski and colleagues observed enrichment near the surface after rapid drying. Binder distribution affected adhesion and ionic resistance. [2] Drying trials should therefore examine the resulting electrode structure alongside solvent removal and processing time.
Does dry electrode coating remove the need for a dry room?
No. Dry coating describes electrode fabrication without a liquid coating solvent; a dry room controls atmospheric moisture around sensitive materials and assembly operations. These address different sources of exposure. Fraunhofer ISE’s electrode manufacturing facilities include dry electrode processing under dry-room conditions, illustrating why the two choices must be assessed separately.
Why monitor particles as well as moisture during cell assembly?
Atmospheric dryness and particle cleanliness describe different aspects of the production environment. A suitable dew point does not establish that particle contamination is controlled. Fraunhofer ISE’s production-environment research monitors both along the process chain. Define requirements for the selected materials and operations, including transfers into and out of enclosed equipment.
What would demonstrate effective cleaning between battery chemistries?
Use a sampling plan that can detect relevant residual materials on equipment and in the first output after cleaning. Specify analytical detection limits, sampling locations and acceptance thresholds justified for the next formulation. This makes the topic’s cross-contamination objective testable; a completed cleaning procedure alone is insufficient evidence of the resulting cleanliness.
What makes production data useful for tracing cell failures?
Connect each cell to its material batches, electrode origin, equipment settings, processing times and test results. This allows a failed cell to be traced back to its manufacturing conditions. Fraunhofer ISE’s cell-production work combines machine and dry-room data recording with development of material tracking, illustrating the information that such traceability needs.
Can inline inspection replace testing of completed cells?
Inline inspection can screen for defined manufacturing defects, but cell performance requires electrochemical testing under relevant conditions. Validate the inspection method against independent checks and report missed defects and false rejections. The JRC Battery Testing Laboratory combines cycling, electrochemical measurements, thermal imaging and post-test diagnosis to examine complementary aspects of cell behaviour.
How should cell lifetime be compared after a manufacturing change?
Compare cells under matched temperature, charge–discharge rates, voltage limits and end-of-life criteria. Report sample numbers, variation and failures alongside capacity retention and resistance changes. Controlled-environment battery testing helps distinguish manufacturing effects from differences in use conditions. Results from accelerated cycling remain conditional on that test protocol.
Can manufacturing energy per cell be compared across different cell formats?
Only if differences in cell energy capacity are accounted for. Alongside energy per accepted cell, report production energy per kilowatt-hour of accepted cell energy capacity, using consistent measurement conditions and process boundaries. Include rejected production and relevant infrastructure loads. This supports the topic’s energy and life-cycle assessment objectives without treating differently sized cells as equivalent products.
References
[1] Ober, S.; Manthiram, A. Enabling fast formation for lithium-ion batteries with a localized high-concentration electrolyte. EES Batteries. 2025;1(4):891–901. doi:10.1039/D5EB00037H
[2] Zankowski, S. P.; Wheeler, S.; Barthelay, T.; Chan, W. M.; Metzler, M.; Grant, P. S. Chemical staining for fundamental studies and optimization of binders in Li-ion battery negative electrodes. Nature Communications. 2026;17:1438. doi:10.1038/s41467-026-69002-1