4.8 Article

Ab initio thermodynamic optimization of Ni-rich Ni-Co-Mn oxide cathode coatings

期刊

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
卷 450, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2019.227693

关键词

Cathode coating; Li-ion batteries; First-principles calculations; Electrochemical stability; Chemical stability

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [U1630134, 51572273, 51622207, 51802187, 11874254]
  2. Shanghai Sailing Program [18YF1408700]
  3. Shanghai Subject Chief Scientist [16XD1401100]
  4. Guangdong Innovation Ream Project [2017ZT07C062]
  5. Shenzhen Pengcheng Scholarship programs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effectiveness of surface coatings in improving the stability and cycling performance of cathodes has been demonstrated since they are first proposed in the 1990's. However, the progress since then is made mostly using the trial-and-error method. Herein; an automated electrochemical-chemical stability design scheme based on first-principles thermodynamics calculations of reaction models is presented to optimize coatings for Ni-rich nickel-cobalt-manganese oxide (NCM) cathodes. Given that the coating must possess a wider electrochemical window than the cathode without the occurrence of Li-ion redistribution at the cathode/coating interface, the reaction energies of both lithium insertion/extraction and decomposition process associated with the coating are used as one of the two screening criteria. As the coating is also required to be chemically stable in Li residues and hydrofluoric-acid containing liquid environment, the positive reaction energy achieved by adjusting molar ratio of the components is used as another criterion. Using these two screening criteria, we demonstrate that lithium-containing metal phosphates, rather than previously suggested Li-containing metal oxides, are the optimal coatings for Ni-rich NCM cathodes, which is confirmed experimentally. The proposed approach is general and can be used to find optimal coating materials for any other cathodes.

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