4.8 Article

Engineering high-energy-density sodium battery anodes for improved cycling with superconcentrated ionic-liquid electrolytes

期刊

NATURE MATERIALS
卷 19, 期 10, 页码 1096-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41563-020-0673-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council (ARC) via the Australian Centre for Electromaterials Science [CE140100012]
  2. ARC [DP160101178]
  3. Australian Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-uniform metal deposition and dendrite formation reduce the efficiency, safety and life of batteries with metal anodes. The influence of these factors in a sodium electrolyte now shows how a molten-salt-like structure at the electrode surface results in dendrite-free metal cycling at higher rates. Non-uniform metal deposition and dendrite formation in high-density energy storage devices reduces the efficiency, safety and life of batteries with metal anodes. Superconcentrated ionic-liquid electrolytes (for example 1:1 ionic liquid:alkali ion) coupled with anode preconditioning at more negative potentials can completely mitigate these issues, and therefore revolutionize high-density energy storage devices. However, the mechanisms by which very high salt concentration and preconditioning potential enable uniform metal deposition and prevent dendrite formation at the metal anode during cycling are poorly understood, and therefore not optimized. Here, we use atomic force microscopy and molecular dynamics simulations to unravel the influence of these factors on the interface chemistry in a sodium electrolyte, demonstrating how a molten-salt-like structure at the electrode surface results in dendrite-free metal cycling at higher rates. Such a structure will support the formation of a more favourable solid electrolyte interphase, accepted as being a critical factor in stable battery cycling. This new understanding will enable engineering of efficient anode electrodes by tuning the interfacial nanostructure via salt concentration and high-voltage preconditioning.

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