4.7 Article

A combined first principles and experimental study on Al-doped Na3V2(PO4)2F3 cathode for rechargeable Na batteries

期刊

SURFACE & COATINGS TECHNOLOGY
卷 434, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2022.128184

关键词

Cathode; Sodium ion batteries; Aluminum; Doping; Theoretical calculations; Na3V2(PO4)(2)F-3

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan [109-2923-E-006-006, 110-2622-M-033-001, 109-2622-E-033-010, 110-2923-E-006-011, 110-3116-F-011-002, 108-E-033-MY3]
  2. Department of Science and Technology-SERB [EMR/2016/006302]
  3. Ministry of Human Resource Development RUSA-Phase 2.0 grant, Dept. of Education, Govt. of India
  4. [F-24-51/2014 U Policy (TNMulti Gen)]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aluminum-doped Na3V2-xAlx(PO4)2F3 cathode materials were synthesized successfully and found to exhibit improved electrochemical performance, with higher discharge capacity and rate in sodium ion batteries.
Aluminum-doped Na3V2-xAlx(PO4)2F3 cathode materials were successfully synthesized using a sol-gel method for sodium ion batteries. Rietveld refinement results for pristine Na3V2(PO4)2F3 and Na3V1.93Al0.07(PO4)2F3 confirmed that no phase change occurred after Al doping. Composition-optimized Na3V1.93Al0.07(PO4)2F3 delivered the highest discharge capacity (121.3 mAh g-1 at 0.1C) and retained 75% capacity after 400 cycles at 5C. Rate capability testing indicates that Na3V1.93Al0.07(PO4)2F3 exhibits rates as high as 57 mAh g-1 at 10C, which was much higher (150%) than that of pristine Na3V2(PO4)2F3 (38 mAh g-1). Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy results showed that the diffusion coefficients of sodium ions could be enhanced from 3.8 x 10-14 cm2/s to 4.14 x 10-14 cm2/s after Al doping. Theoretical calculations on Na3V2(PO4)2F3 and doped material were also compared by first principle calculations in terms of bang gaps and density of states. The findings indicate that optimal Al doping makes NVPF as a promising cathode material for sodium-ion batteries.

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