4.6 Article

Comparing the Purity of Rolled versus Evaporated Lithium Metal Films Using X-ray Microtomography

Journal

ACS ENERGY LETTERS
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 1120-1124

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsenergylett.2c00255

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. US Department of Energy's Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Vehicles Technologies Office
  2. National Science Foundation [DGE-2020294884, DGE-2752814]
  3. Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comparison was made between lithium metal films produced via rolling and thermal evaporation using synchrotron hard X-ray microtomography. The study found that the evaporated lithium metal films had a much lower impurity concentration compared to the rolled lithium metal films. The analysis of the film interfaces further emphasized the importance of interface engineering in producing high-quality lithium metal batteries.
Here, we present a comparison of lithium metal films produced via rolling and thermal evaporation using synchrotron hard X-ray microtomography. In past studies of rolled lithium metal foils, a large number of C, O, and N impurities were found and identified as the key cause for failure in lithium metal cells. In this comparison, the X-ray tomography data show that the evaporated lithium metal films have an average impurity concentration of 19 particles/mm(3) in comparison to 1350 particles/mm(3) in the rolled lithium metal. An analysis of the inner substrate/lithium interface and outer lithium surface of the thermally evaporated film shows a much greater concentration of impurities at these interfaces, further emphasizing the importance of interface engineering in producing high-quality lithium metal batteries. We show that, if surface contamination can be avoided, it is possible to obtain lithium films with no impurities detectable by synchrotron hard X-ray tomography.

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