4.7 Article

TiO2 nanoparticle embedded nitrogen doped electrospun helical carbon nanofiber-carbon nanotube hybrid anode for lithium-ion batteries

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 46, 期 2, 页码 2464-2478

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.10.149

关键词

Carbon nanofiber; Carbon nanotube; TiO2 nanoparticle; Electrospinning; Lithium-ion battery

资金

  1. UGC post doc fellowship for women, India
  2. DST-SERB

向作者/读者索取更多资源

TiO2 nanoparticles decorated nitrogen-doped helical carbon nanofiber-carbon nanotube hybrid material with high specific surface area and nanoporous structure was prepared by low-cost electrospinning and hydrothermal method. The hybrid material showed higher reversible charge capacities compared to conventional graphite microbeads anode, indicating better performance than graphite for LIBs.
TiO2 nanoparticles decorated nitrogen (N) doped helical carbon nanofiber (CNF)-carbon nanotube (CNT) hybrid material is prepared by low-cost electrospinning technique followed by hydrothermal method. Morphological investigations establish helical structure of CNFs with hierarchical growth of CNTs around CNFs. The hybrid material shows a high specific surface area of 295.17 m(2) g(-1) with nanoporous structure. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic studies establish Ti-O-C/Ti-C bond mediated charge transfer channel between TiO2 nanoparticles and carbon structures with the success of N doping in CNFs. The electrospun hybrid material delivered high reversible charge capacities of 316 mAh g(-1) (100th cycle) and 244 mAh g(-1) (100th cycle) at a current density of 75 mA g(-1) and 186 mA g(-1) respectively. The charge capacities obtained for different applied current densities are higher than the conventional graphitic microporous microbeads anode. Results indicate that the hybrid material reported here shows high performance compare to graphite for LIBs. (C) 2020 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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