4.6 Article

Thermodynamics of electromechanically coupled mixed ionic-electronic conductors: Deformation potential, Vegard strains, and flexoelectric effect

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW B
卷 83, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.195313

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ukraine State Agency on Science, Innovation and Informatization [UU30/004]
  2. National Science Foundation [DMR-0908718, DMR-0820404]
  3. Materials Science and Engineering Division, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, U.S. DOE
  4. Swiss National Science Foundation
  5. Division Of Materials Research
  6. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [820404, 908718] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Strong coupling among external voltage, electrochemical potentials, concentrations of electronic and ionic species, and strains is a ubiquitous feature of solid statemixed ionic-electronic conductors (MIECs), the materials of choice in devices ranging from electroresistive and memristive elements to ion batteries and fuel cells. Here, we analyze in detail the electromechanical coupling mechanisms and derive generalized bias-concentration-strain equations for MIECs including contributions of concentration-driven chemical expansion, deformation potential, and flexoelectric effect. This analysis is extended toward the bias-induced strains in the uniform and scanning-probe-microscopy-like geometries. Notably, the contribution of the electron-phonon and flexoelectric coupling to the local surface displacement of the mixed ionic-electronic conductor caused by the electric field scanning probe microscope tip has not been considered previously. The developed thermodynamic approach allows evolving the theoretical description of mechanical phenomena induced by the electric fields (electromechanical response) in solid state ionics toward analytical theory and phase-field modeling of the MIECs in different geometries and under varying electrical, chemical, and mechanical boundary conditions.

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