4.6 Article

Electrochemical process of sulfur in carbon materials from electrode thickness to interlayer

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENERGY CHEMISTRY
Volume 31, Issue -, Pages 119-124

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jechem.2018.06.001

Keywords

Lithium-sulfur battery; Electrochemical reaction; Cathode thickness; Chemical potential; Ion diffusion

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2016YFA0200102, 2016YFB0100100, 2014CB932402]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51525206, 51521091, 51372253, U1401243, 21576159]
  3. Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [2015150]
  4. Institute of Metal Research [2015-PY03]
  5. Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA09010104]
  6. Key Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [KGZD-EW-T06]
  7. CAS/SAFEA International Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lots of efforts have been done on different porous carbon materials as cathode for Lithium-sulfur (Li-S) battery. However, seldom researches have been done on the relationship between cathode thickness and electrochemical performance. Our work investigates the relation between electrochemical performance and cathode thickness with typical porous carbon materials. We explain the phenomenon that only a modest cathode thickness can have the most adequate electrochemical reaction trend through the aspect of thermodynamics (chemical potential) so that the best electrochemical performance can be obtained. Besides, interlayer can remit the shuttle effect but hinder the lithium ion diffusion process simultaneously. And we verify the effect of interlayer thickness on the shuttle effect and lithium ion diffusion process. (C) 2018 Science Press and Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. and Science Press. All rights reserved.

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