4.8 Article

Calculations of Li-Ion Diffusion in Olivine Phosphates

Journal

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
Volume 23, Issue 17, Pages 4032-4037

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cm201604g

Keywords

lithium ions; iron phosphate; diffusion; kinetics; anti-site defects; polarons

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-SC0001091]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Kinetic pathways of Li-ion diffusion in olivine phosphates are calculated from density functional theory (DFT). Previously reported theoretical diffusion rates for Li ions and vacancies in defect-free crystalline FePO(4) and LiFePO(4) are six orders of magnitude faster than experimentally measured values. This discrepancy can be resolved by considering the different components of Li kinetics, including diffusion in the bulk, on the surface, in the presence of defects, and in varying local environments. Using DFT+U, we quantify each of these effects and determine that, while bulk diffusion is affected by strain and Li concentration, these are not significant enough to explain the slow diffusion observed in experiment. However, surface diffusion is observed to have have high barriers, which could contribute to slow kinetics in nanostructured cathodes. Anti-site defects also provide a possible explanation for slow diffusion, but only for vacancy diffusion in LiFePO(4), which has a barrier of 0.71 eV, compared to 0.29 eV in defect-free channels. In FePO(4), a concerted Li-ion diffusion mechanism around the anti-site defect is found to have a low barrier of 0.35 eV, allowing for facile cross-channel diffusion at room temperature. The difference between Li-ion and vacancy diffusion is understood in terms of a favorable coordination between Li ions and localized electrons on Fe centers at the transition states for Li-ion hopping in FePO(4). Greater distances between vacancies and holes at the transition states for vacancy diffusion lead to higher diffusion barriers.

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