4.7 Article

Electrospun zeolitic imidazolate framework-derived nitrogen-doped carbon nanofibers with high performance for lithium-sulfur batteries

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESEARCH
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 1892-1902

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/er.4389

关键词

electrochemical performances; lithium polysulfides; lithium-sulfur batteries; N-CNF membrane

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51874146, 51504101]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018T110551, 2017M621640]
  3. Six Talent Peaks Project of Jiangsu Province [XCL-125]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20150514]
  5. Start-up Foundation of Jiangsu University for Senior Talents [15JDG014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Three-dimensional (3D) nitrogen-doped carbon nanofibers (N-CNFs) which were originating from nitrogen-containing zeolitic imidazolate framework-8 (ZIF-8) were obtained by a combined electrospinning/carbonization technique. The pores uniformly distributed in N-CNFs result in the improvement of electrical conductivity, increasing of BET surface area (142.82 m(2) g(-1)), and high porosity. The as-synthesized 3D free-standing N-CNFs membrane was applied as the current collector and binder free containing Li2S6 catholyte for lithium-sulfur batteries. As a novel composite cathode, the free-standing N-CNFs/Li2S6 membrane shows more stable electrochemical behavior than the CNFs/Li2S6 membrane, exhibiting a high first-cycle discharge specific capacity of 1175 mAh g(-1)at 0.1 C and keeping discharge specific capacity of 702 mAh g(-1) at higher rate. More importantly, as the sulfur mass in cathodes was increased at 7.11 mg, the N-CNFs/Li2S6 membrane delivered 467 mAh g(-1)after 150 cycles at 0.2 C. The excellent electrochemical properties of N-CNFs/Li2S6 membrane can be ascribed to synergistic effects of high porosity and nitrogen-doping in N-CNFs from carbonized ZIF-8, illustrating collective effects of physisorption and chemisorption for lithium polysulfides in discharge-charge processes.

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

4.7
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