4.6 Article

Octahedral tin dioxide nanocrystals as high capacity anode materials for Na-ion batteries

期刊

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 15, 期 30, 页码 12543-12550

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3cp52037d

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council through the ARC Discovery project [DP1093855]
  2. Future fellowship project [FT110100800]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [R32-2008-000-20093-0]
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [R32-2012-000-20093-0] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Single crystalline SnO2 nanocrystals (similar to 60 nm in size) with a uniform octahedral shape were synthesised using a hydrothermal method. Their phase and morphology were characterized by XRD and FESEM observation. TEM and HRTEM analyses identified that SnO2 octahedral nanocrystals grow along the [001] direction, consisting of dominantly exposed {221} high energy facets. When applied as anode materials for Na-ion batteries, SnO2 nanocrystals exhibited high reversible sodium storage capacity and excellent cyclability (432 mA h g(-1) after 100 cycles). In particular, SnO2 nanocrystals also demonstrated a good high rate performance. Ex situ TEM analysis revealed the reaction mechanism of SnO2 nanocrystals for reversible Na ion storage. It was found that Na ions first insert into SnO2 crystals at the high voltage plateau (from 3 V to similar to 0.8 V), and that the exposed (1 x 1) tunnel-structure could facilitate the initial insertion of Na ions. Subsequently, Na ions react with SnO2 to form NaxSn alloys and Na2O in the low voltage range (from similar to 0.8 V to 0.01 V). The superior cyclability of SnO2 nanocrystals could be mainly ascribed to the reversible Na-Sn alloying and de-alloying reactions. Furthermore, the reduced Na2O matrix may help retard the aggregation of tin nanocrystals, leading to an enhanced electrochemical performance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据