4.8 Article

High-resolution chemical analysis on cycled LiFePO4 battery electrodes using energy-filtered transmission electron microscopy

Journal

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
Volume 246, Issue -, Pages 512-521

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.08.003

Keywords

LiFePO4; TEM; Electron energy loss spectroscopy; Phase transformation

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy through the Sandia Laboratory Directed research and Development program
  2. Office of Basic Energy Science, Division of Materials Sciences and Engineering
  3. Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  4. U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration [DE-AC04-94AL85000]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We demonstrate an ex situ method for analyzing the chemistry of battery electrode particles after electrochemical cycling using the transmission electron microscope (TEM). The arrangement of particles during our analysis is the same as when the particles are being cycled. We start by sectioning LiFePO4 battery electrodes using an ultramicrotome. We then show that mapping of the Fe2+ and Fe3+ oxidation state using energy-filtered TEM (EFTEM) and multivariate statistical analysis techniques can be used to determine the spatial distribution of Li in the particles. This approach is validated by comparison with scanning transmission X-ray microscopy (STXM) analysis of the same samples [Chueh et al. Nanoletters, 13 (3) (2013) 866-72]. EFTEM uses a parallel electron beam and reduces the electron-beam dose (and potential beam-induced damage) to the sample when compared to alternate techniques that use a focused probe (e.g. STEM-EELS). Our analysis confirms that under the charging conditions of the analyzed battery, mixed phase particles are rare and thus Li intercalation is limited by the nucleation of new phases. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available