4.6 Article

New rock salt-related oxides Li3M2RuO6 (M=Co, Ni): Synthesis, structure, magnetism and electrochemistry

Journal

JOURNAL OF SOLID STATE CHEMISTRY
Volume 203, Issue -, Pages 160-165

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jssc.2013.03.054

Keywords

Ruthenium oxides; Rock salt structures; Magnetism; Electrochemistry

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion (MICINN, Direccion General de Cooperacion Internacional) [ACI2009-0972]
  2. (MICINN) [MAT2010-19837-006, MAT2010-19460]
  3. Comunidad de Madrid [S2009/PPQ-1626]
  4. Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India
  5. Indo-Spanish project
  6. Ramanna Fellowship
  7. INSA, New Delhi

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We describe the synthesis, crystal structure, magnetic and electrochemical characterization of new rock salt-related oxides of formula, Li3M2RuO6 (M=Co, Ni). The M=Co oxide adopts the LiCoO2 (R-3m) structure, where sheets of LiO6 and (Co-2/Ru)O-6 octahedra are alternately stacked along the c-direction. The M=Ni oxide also adopts a similar layered structure related to Li2TiO3, where partial mixing of Li and Ni/Ru atoms lowers the symmetry to monoclinic (C2/c). Magnetic susceptibility measurements reveal that in Li3Co2RuO6, the oxidation states of transition metal ions are Co3+ (S=0), Co2+ (S=1/2) and Ru4+ (S=1), all of them in low-spin configuration and at 10 K, the material orders antiferromagnetically. Analogous Li3Ni2RuO6 presents a ferrimagnetic behavior with a Curie temperature of 100 K. The differences in the magnetic behavior have been explained in terms of differences in the crystal structure. Electrochemical studies correlate well with both magnetic properties and crystal structure. Li-transition metal intermixing may be at the origin of the more impeded oxidation of Li3Ni2RuO6 when compared to Li3CO2RuO6. Interestingly high first charge capacities (between ca. 160 and 180 mAh g(-1)) corresponding to ca. 2/3 of theoretical capacity are reached albeit, in both cases, capacity retention and cyclability are not satisfactory enough to consider these materials as alternatives to LiCoO2. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available