4.6 Article

Three-Dimensional Silicon Carbide from Siligraphene as a High Capacity Lithium Ion Battery Anode Material

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
Volume 123, Issue 45, Pages 27295-27304

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.9b06151

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [LE190100021, LE160100051, DP170103721]
  2. Australian Government
  3. Pawsey Centre
  4. Queensland Cyber Infrastructure Foundation (QCIF)
  5. University of Queensland Research Computing Centre
  6. Australian Government through an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship
  7. Australian Research Council [LE190100021] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We report density functional theory calculations for two siligraphene membranes, SiC3 and SiC7, to assess their suitability as lithium ion anode materials. We find high capacities of 627.09 and 955.84 mA h g(-1) for the SiC3 and SiC7 monolayers, respectively. Both membranes also facilitate excellent lithium mobility with barriers of less than 0.5 eV. We find van der Waals stacked bilayer configurations for both siligraphenes. The volume expansion in the bilayer for SiC3 on lithiation is 28%, whereas the expansion for SiC7 is much higher at 62%. Both bilayers remain stable under high lithium loading. For the first time for siligraphene materials, we report bulk configurations for SiC3 and SiC7. Here we find that the siligraphenes form three-dimensional structures with cavities and channels. The layers are not held together by van der Waals forces, but rather by single silicon-silicon and single silicon-carbon bonds. Surprisingly, these three-dimensional siligraphene bulk structures have a larger average interlayer distance than the van der Waals structures which yields an expansion due to lithiation of 20% for SiC3 and a very small expansion of 4% for SiC7.

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