4.8 Article

Surface reconstruction and chemical evolution of stoichiometric layered cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4529

关键词

-

资金

  1. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of Vehicle Technologies of the U.S. Department of Energy under the Batteries for Advanced Transportation Technologies (BATT) Program [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  2. US Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-AC02-98CH10886]
  3. US Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  4. Office of Science of the US Department of Energy [DE-AC03-76SF00098]
  5. Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE)
  6. National Science Foundation [OCI-1053575]
  7. NSF graduate research fellowship programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study sheds light on the long-standing challenges associated with high-voltage operation of LiNixMnxCo1-2xO2 cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Using correlated ensemble-averaged high-throughput X-ray absorption spectroscopy and spatially resolved electron microscopy and spectroscopy, here we report structural reconstruction (formation of a surface reduced layer, R (3) over barm to Fm (3) over barm transition) and chemical evolution (formation of a surface reaction layer) at the surface of LiNixMnxCo1-2xO2 particles. These are primarily responsible for the prevailing capacity fading and impedance buildup under high-voltage cycling conditions, as well as the first-cycle coulombic inefficiency. It was found that the surface reconstruction exhibits a strong anisotropic characteristic, which predominantly occurs along lithium diffusion channels. Furthermore, the surface reaction layer is composed of lithium fluoride embedded in a complex organic matrix. This work sets a refined example for the study of surface reconstruction and chemical evolution in battery materials using combined diagnostic tools at complementary length scales.

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

4.8
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