4.7 Article

Simulating the charging of cylindrical electrolyte-filled pores with the modified Poisson-Nernst-Planck equations

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
Volume 156, Issue 21, Pages -

Publisher

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0094553

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [22078088]
  2. Shanghai Rising-Star Program [21QA1401900]
  3. Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW)
  4. Chinese Scholarship Council
  5. EU-FET project NANOPHLOW [REP-766972-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Understanding how electrolyte-filled porous electrodes respond to an applied potential is important to many electrochemical technologies. In this study, the authors investigate this phenomenon by studying a model supercapacitor and validate the theoretical predictions using numerical methods.
Understanding how electrolyte-filled porous electrodes respond to an applied potential is important to many electrochemical technologies. Here, we consider a model supercapacitor of two blocking cylindrical pores on either side of a cylindrical electrolyte reservoir. A stepwise potential difference 2 phi between the pores drives ionic fluxes in the setup, which we study through the modified Poisson-Nernst-Planck equations, solved with finite elements. We focus our discussion on the dominant timescales with which the pores charge and how these timescales depend on three dimensionless numbers. Next to the dimensionless applied potential phi, we consider the ratio R/R-b of the pore's resistance R to the bulk reservoir resistance R-b and the ratio r(p)/lambda of the pore radius r(p) to the Debye length lambda. We compare our data to theoretical predictions by Aslyamov and Janssen (phi), Posey and Morozumi (R/R-b), and Henrique, Zuk, and Gupta (r(p)/lambda). Through our numerical approach, we delineate the validity of these theories and the assumptions on which they were based. Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing.

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