4.7 Article

Ion Transport and the True Transference Number in Nonaqueous Polyelectrolyte Solutions for Lithium Ion Batteries

Journal

ACS CENTRAL SCIENCE
Volume 5, Issue 7, Pages 1250-1260

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acscentsci.9b00406

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NSF GRFP [DGE 1752814]
  2. Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Vehicle Technologies Office, U.S. Department of Energy under the Advanced Battery Materials Research (BMR) Program [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nonaqueous polyelectrolyte solutions have been recently proposed as high Li+ transference number electrolytes for lithium ion batteries. However, the atomistic phenomena governing ion diffusion and migration in polyelectrolytes are poorly understood, particularly in nonaqueous solvents. Here, the structural and transport properties of a model polyelectrolyte solution, poly(allyl glycidyl ether-lithium sulfonate) in dimethyl sulfoxide, are studied using all-atom molecular dynamics simulations. We find that the static structural analysis of Li+ ion pairing is insufficient to fully explain the overall conductivity trend, necessitating a dynamic analysis of the diffusion mechanism, in which we observe a shift from largely vehicular transport to more structural diffusion as the Li+ concentration increases. Furthermore, we demonstrate that despite the significantly higher diffusion coefficient of the lithium ion, the negatively charged polyion is responsible for the majority of the solution conductivity at all concentrations, corresponding to Li+ transference numbers much lower than previously estimated experimentally. We quantify the ion-ion correlations unique to polyelectrolyte systems that are responsible for this surprising behavior. These results highlight the need to reconsider the approximations typically made for transport in polyelectrolyte solutions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available