4.7 Article

Correlating the effect of dopant type (Al, Ga, Ta) on the mechanical and electrical properties of hot-pressed Li-garnet electrolyte

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN CERAMIC SOCIETY
Volume 40, Issue 54, Pages 1999-2006

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2019.12.054

Keywords

Li7La3Zr2O12 mechanical; Electrical; Microstructure; Al Ga Ta dopants

Funding

  1. Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy award [DE-AR0000653]
  2. NRF of Korea [NRF-2018R1D1A1B07048390, NRF-2017K1A3A1A30083363]
  3. University of Michigan College of Engineering
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2018R1D1A1B07048390] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effect of cubic-phase stabilizing dopant (Al, Ga, Ta) on the mechanical and electrochemical properties of Li garnet solid electrolyte was studied. Dense Li6.25La3Al0.25Zr2O12, Li6.50La3Ta0.50Zr1.5O12, Li6.25La3Ga0.25Zr2O12 were prepared by conventional solid-state synthesis of powder and densified using hot pressing. Ga-LLZO exhibited the highest fracture stress (similar to 143 MPa), fracture toughness (similar to 1.22 MPa m(1/2)) and total conductivity (similar to 1 mS/cm) of the three materials; however, the bulk conductivity was about 1.5 mS/cm. We believe that the weak grain-boundaries, as evidenced by a predominately intergranular fracture, correlates with a relatively high grain-boundary impedance, thus reducing the value of the total conductivity by about 30 % lower than that for the bulk. Based on the combined mechanical and electrical properties, overall, Li6.25La3Ga0.25Zr2O12 exhibits the most favorable combination of some of the most salient properties of the three dopants. We believe the results of this study will facilitate the commercialization of Li metal batteries using Li-garnet ceramic electrolyte.

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