4.8 Article

Flower-like carbon cathode prepared via in situ assembly for Zn-ion hybrid supercapacitors

期刊

CARBON
卷 180, 期 -, 页码 254-264

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbon.2021.04.093

关键词

Flower-like carbon; In situ assembly; Carbon nanosheets; Zn-ion hybrid supercapacitors

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2019BEM039]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51876080]
  3. RUDN University Strategic Academic Leadership Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By utilizing the spheroidizing growth of hydrothermal carbon as an assembly drive and in situ formed melamine cyanurate nanosheets as a structure-directing agent, a promising B, N, and O co-doped carbon flower was successfully designed and assembled for the cathode of Zn2+ hybrids supercapacitors, showing excellent performance.
Three-dimensional (3D) carbon from the assembly of low-dimensionally isolated segments have attracted much attention as these carbon materials not only inherit the superiorities of individual building blocks but also acquire new synergic effects. However, it remains a big issue to assemble isolated carbon segments into a 3D carbon superstructure by a facile strategy. Herein, the spheroidizing growth of hydrothermal carbon as an assembly drive and in situ formed melamine cyanurate nanosheets as structure-directing agent are combined to design and assemble B, N and O co-doped carbon flower as a promising cathode for Zn2+ hybrids supercapacitors. The flower-like carbon exhibits large nanosheets area, interlinked conductive network, nanoscale architecture and rich electroactive sites. Boron doping enhances the chemical adsorption of SO42- onto the carbon cathode surface and the reaction between oxygen dopant and Zn ions added additional capacity for Zn-ion supercapacitors. The resulting device achieves an energy density of 119.7 Wh/kg at 890 W/kg and maintains 63.5 Wh/kg even at a power density of 16.5 kW/kg. (C) 2021 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

4.8
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