4.7 Article

Manipulating Zn-ion flux by two-dimensional porous g-C3N4 nanosheets for dendrite-free zinc metal anode

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 433, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2021.134077

关键词

Separators; Zinc metal anodes; Aqueous zinc ion batteries; g-C3N4 nanosheets

资金

  1. Singapore MOE [R-284000-226-114, MOE 2018-T2-1-149]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Zinc metal anode is a promising choice in aqueous zinc ion batteries, but zinc dendrite growth compromises its practicability. In this study, a modified separator was developed by coating g-C3N4 nanosheets onto commercial cellulose fiber separator. The g-C3N4 coated separator enables dendrite-free zinc deposition and improves the reversibility of zinc metal anodes.
Zinc metal anode is a promising choice in aqueous zinc ion batteries (ZIBs) due to its high volumetric capacity, low toxicity, and natural abundance. However, zinc dendrite growth severely compromises the practicability of zinc metal anode in large-scale utilizations of ZIBs. As a key component of ZIB, separator plays an important role in regulating zinc ion flux and thus has a direct impact on zinc dendrite growth. However, little attention has been paid on the the effect of separator on dendrite growth. Herein, we report a modified separator by coating a layer of g-C3N4 nanosheets onto commercial cellulose fiber separator via a simple drop casting route. The porous two-dimensional g-C3N4 nanosheets act as ion redistributors to induce homogenous zinc ion flux, thus the g-C3N4 coated separator enables a dendrite-free zinc deposition and improves the reversibility of zinc metal anodes. As a result, the Zn||Zn symmetric cell using the g-C3N4 coated separator exhibits a 300-fold improvement in cycling lifetime of over 590 h at 3 mA cm(-2) and the coulombic efficiency of Zn||Cu asymmetric cell with g-C3N4 coated separator maintains at 99.2% at 1 mA cm(-2) for over 750 cycles, which are better than most of the reported ZIBs to date.

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