4.7 Article

Porous polymer thin film encapsulated sulfur nanoparticles on graphene via partial evaporation for high-performance lithium-sulfur batteries

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 547, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2021.149199

关键词

Lithium-sulfur batteries; Porous polymer thin film; Ion transfer channel; Instant polymerization; Partial evaporation

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning [NRF-2018R1C1B6004385, NRF-2021R1A2C4001777]
  2. Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE), Republic of Korea [20013794]
  3. R&D Program for Forest Science Technology by Korea Forest Service [FTIS 2020216B10-2022-AC01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a uniquely structured composite electrode p-PVAc/S/G that breaks through the trade-off between energy density and rate capability in lithium-sulfur batteries, delivering excellent electrochemical performance.
Lithium-sulfur batteries, owing to their excellent advantages (including low cost and high theoretical energy density), might be the next-generation energy storage devices. However, the low S contents in their electrodes and the shuttling effect of soluble polysulfides can significantly deteriorate their capacities and cycle lives. Herein, we demonstrate a uniquely structured composite electrode, named porous polymerized vinyl acetate (p-PVAc) thin films, to break through the trade-off between the energy density and rate capability. S nanoparticles were encapsulated by porous p-PVAc layers and then anchored on graphene (p-PVAc/S/G), facilitating ion exchange and electron transfer during electrochemical operations. Consequently, p-PVAc/S/G delivered a high specific capacity of 719 mAh g(-1) at 0.1 A g(-1) and exceeded even 350 mAh g(-1) at a high current density of 5 A g(-1), whereas the average Coulombic efficiency was preserved to be higher than 98.50% when repeated for more than 300 cycles at 1 A g(-1).

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