4.8 Article

Improved Performance of the Silicon Anode for Li-Ion Batteries: Understanding the Surface Modification Mechanism of Fluoroethylene Carbonate as an Effective Electrolyte Additive

Journal

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
Volume 27, Issue 7, Pages 2591-2599

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b00339

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Swedish Energy Agency [34191-1]
  2. Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems (Vinnova)
  3. European Community [312284]
  4. Helmholz-Zentrum Berlin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Silicon as a negative electrode material for lithium-ion batteries has attracted tremendous attention due to its high theoretical capacity, and fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) was used as an electrolyte additive, which significantly improved the cyclability of silicon-based electrodes in this study. The decomposition of the FEC additive was investigated by synchrotron-based X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (PES) giving a chemical composition depth-profile. The reduction products of FEC were found to mainly consist of LiF and -CHF-OCO2-type compounds. Moreover, FEC influenced the lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) decomposition reaction and may have suppressed further salt degradation. The solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) formed from the decomposition of ethylene carbonate (EC) and diethyl carbonate (DEC), without the FEC additive present, covered surface voids and lead to an increase in polarization. However, in the presence of FEC, which degrades at a higher reduction potential than EC and DEC, instantaneously a conformal SEI was formed on the silicon electrode. This stable SEI layer sufficiently limited the emergence of large cracks and preserved the original surface morphology as well as suppressed the additional SEI formation from the other solvent. This study highlights the vital importance of how the chemical composition and morphology of the SEI influence battery performance.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available