4.8 Article

Confined Fe2VO4⊂Nitrogen-Doped Carbon Nanowires with Internal Void Space for High-Rate and Ultrastable Potassium-Ion Storage

期刊

ADVANCED ENERGY MATERIALS
卷 9, 期 46, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/aenm.201902674

关键词

anode materials; electrochemical properties; Fe2VO4 nanowires; heterostructures; potassium-ion batteries

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51571151, 51701139, 51671143, U1601216]
  2. Helmholtz Association
  3. German Research Foundation, DFG [MA 5039/4-1]
  4. China Scholarship Council (CSC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Developing low-cost, high-capacity, high-rate, and robust earth-abundant electrode materials for energy storage is critical for the practical and scalable application of advanced battery technologies. Herein, the first example of synthesizing 1D peapod-like bimetallic Fe2VO4 nanorods confined in N-doped carbon porous nanowires with internal void space (Fe2VO4 subset of NC nanopeapods) as a high-capacity and stable anode material for potassium-ion batteries (KIBs) is reported. The peapod-like Fe2VO4 subset of NC nanopeapod heterostructures with interior void space and external carbon shell efficiently prevent the aggregation of the active materials, facilitate fast transportation of electrons and ions, and accommodate volume variation during the cycling process, which substantially boosts the rate and cycling performance of Fe2VO4. The Fe2VO4 subset of NC electrode exhibits high reversible specific depotassiation capacity of 380 mAh g(-1) at 100 mA g(-1) after 60 cycles and remarkable rate capability as well as long cycling stability with a high capacity of 196 mAh g(-1) at 4 A g(-1) after 2300 cycles. The first-principles calculations reveal that Fe2VO4 subset of NC nanopeapods have high ionic/electronic conductivity characteristics and low diffusion barriers for K+-intercalation. This study opens up new way for investigating high-capacity metal oxide as high-rate and robust electrode materials for KIBs.

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