4.6 Article

Pomegranate-like Ti-doped LiNi0.4Mn1.6O4 5 V-class cathode with superior high-voltage cycle and rate performance for Li-ion batteries

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE
卷 231, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2020.116297

关键词

LiNi0.4Mn1.6O4; High voltage; Ti doping; Rapid charge; Li-ion batteries

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21975074, 91534202, 91834301]
  2. Shanghai Scientific and Technological Innovation Project [18JC1410500]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [222201718002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel Ti-doped LiNi0.4Mn1.6O4 cathode material with a pomegranate-like structure is reported in this study, which can enhance lithium ion transfer rate and reduce electrochemical polarization, leading to improved cycle performance and charge-discharge rate.
The high-voltage and low-cost lithium nickel manganese oxides are regarded as the most potential cathode materials for high-density Li-ion batteries (LIBs), but the inferior ionic conductivity and vulnerable lattice oxygen limit their rate and cycle capabilities. Herein, we report a unique pomegranate-like Ti-doped LiNi0.4Mn1.6O4 cathode materials (LNMTO) without surface residues, which are expected to greatly shorten the Li+ transfer distance, enhance reaction kinetics and reduce the electrochemical polarization. Meantime, the strong Ti-O bonds can robust the lattice oxygen and stabilize the crystal structure during electrochemical reactions process. Consequently, the LNMTO exhibits a fast charge-discharge capability with a high reversible capacity of 101 mAh g(1) within 3.5-5.0 V even at 10C with an 84.4% capacity retention after 500 cycles at 1C, which is superior to the reported LiNi0.4Mn1.6O4-related cathode materials. This work provides a novel inspiration to design and synthesize high-voltage cobalt-free based cathode materials with satisfied lithium storage performances. (C) 2020 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

4.6
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