4.8 Article

Highly Adhesive Li-BN Nanosheet Composite Anode with Excellent Interfacial Compatibility for Solid-State Li Metal Batteries

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 13, 期 12, 页码 14549-14556

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.9b08803

关键词

solid-state batteries; lithium metal anode; BN nanosheets; interface compatibility; adhesiveness

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFB0905400]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51802224, 51632001]
  3. Shanghai Rising-Star Program [19QA1409300]
  4. Shanghai Aerospace Science and Technology Innovation Fundation [SISP2018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Solid-state lithium metal batteries (SSLMBs) are promising energy storage devices by employing lithium metal anodes and solid-state electrolytes (SSEs) to offer high energy density and high safety. However, their efficiency is limited by Li metal/SSE interface barriers, including insufficient contact area and chemical/electrochemical incompatibility. Herein, a strategy to effectively improve the adhesiveness of Li metal to garnet-type SSE is proposed by adding only a few two-dimensional boron nitride nanosheets (BNNS) (5 wt %) into Li metal by triggering the transition from point contact to complete adhesion between Li metal and ceramic SSE. The interface between the Li-BNNS composite anode and the garnet exhibits a low interfacial resistance of 9 Omega cm(2), which is significantly lower than that of bare Li/garnet interface (560 Omega cm(2)). Furthermore, the enhanced contact and the additional BNNS in the interface act synergistically to offer a high critical current density of 1.5 mA/cm(2) and a stable electrochemical plating/striping over 380 h. Moreover, the full cell paired with the Li-BNNS composite anode and the LiFePO4 cathode shows stable cycling performance at room temperature. Our results introduce an appealing composite strategy with two-dimensional materials to overcome the interface challenges, which provide more opportunities for the development of SSLMBs.

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