4.6 Article

Electrochemical elaboration of electrodes and electrolytes for 3D structured batteries

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
卷 1, 期 32, 页码 9281-9293

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3ta11921a

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swedish Energy Agency (STEM)
  2. Swedish Research Council (VR)
  3. StandUp for energy
  4. KIC EIT Innoenergy (STORAGE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The challenges associated with the fabrication of three-dimensional (3D) electrode and electrolyte materials for Li-ion batteries are discussed. The basic issues for achieving a solid 3D cell foundation, which can simultaneously offer sufficient electronic conductivity to enable stable cycling, as well as enough compatibility with the incorporation of complementary components, have been addressed. Various electrochemical strategies for elaborating such systems are discussed and critically examined. Several current collector systems are presented including electrochemically prepared Cu and Al nanorods and commercial aperiodic carbon structures. Further electrochemical coating approaches then provide a direct method for the deposition of thin layers of active materials successfully demonstrated here as coatings on both 3D metal structures and commercially available 3D-structured carbon substrates. Enhanced capacities per foot print area are demonstrated for a number of 3D electrode materials, namely polyaniline on reticulated vitreous carbon, Cu2O on copper nanorods and TiO2 on Al nanorods. The crucial points for achieving a thin conformal coating of the corresponding 3D electrode structures with solid polymer electrolytes are also carefully analysed and discussed. In this context electro-polymerisation is proposed as a viable route to form thin electrolyte layers with promising characteristics. The high versatility of electro-polymerisation in combination with the various structures and methodologies adopted here represents a further step towards the development of cost-effective 3D microbattery devices.

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