4.7 Article

Covalent Bonding of Si Nanoparticles on Graphite Nanosheets as Anodes for Lithium-Ion Batteries Using Diazonium Chemistry

期刊

NANOMATERIALS
卷 9, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nano9121741

关键词

silicon; graphite nanosheets; diazotization reaction; anode

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFF0210703]
  2. National Nature Science Foundation of China [51702157, 51707016, 51801001, 51407134, 21603103]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2017M611795, 2018T110944, 2016M590619]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Colleges and Universities of Jiangsu Province in China [17KJB150022]
  5. Provincial Key Research and Development Program of Shaanxi [2019GY-197]
  6. Key Project of Baoji University of Arts and Sciences [ZK2018051]
  7. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2019YQ24]
  8. Key Laboratory of Engineering Dielectrics and Its Application (Harbin University of Science and Technology), Ministry of Education [KFZ1803]
  9. Qingchuang Talents Induction Program of Shandong Higher Education Institution (Research and Innovation Team of Structural-Functional Polymer Composites)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Silicon/carbon (Si/C) composite has been proven to be an effective method of enhancing the electrochemical performance of Si-based anodes for lithium-ion batteries (LIBs). However, the practical application of Si/C materials in LIBs is difficult because of the weak interaction between Si and C. In this study, we applied two-step diazotization reactions to modify graphite nanosheets (GNs) and Si nanoparticles (Si NPs), yielding a stable Si-Ar-GNs composite. Owing to aryl (Ar) group bonding, Si NPs were dispersed well on the GNs. The as-prepared Si-Ar-GNs composite delivered an initial reversible capacity of 1174.7 mAhg(-1) at a current density of 100 mAhg(-1). Moreover, capacity remained at 727.3 mAhg(-1) after 100 cycles, showing improved cycling performance. This synthesis strategy can be extended to prepare other Si/C anode materials of LIBs.

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