4.8 Article

Stabilizing the interphase between Li and Argyrodite electrolyte through synergistic phosphating process for all-solid-state lithium batteries

期刊

NANO ENERGY
卷 96, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2022.107104

关键词

Interphase; Dendrite suppression; Sulfide electrolyte; All-solid-state lithium batteries

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51971201, U20A20126]
  2. Development Program of Zhejiang Province [2021C01175]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Among solid electrolytes, sulfides are considered promising candidates due to their softness and high ionic conductivity. However, the interface problem between Li metal and sulfide electrolytes has been a concern. This work presents a two-step phosphating process to create a hybrid interphase with high ionic conductivity and low electronic conductivity, providing excellent stability for lithium metal in all-solid-state lithium batteries.
Among solid electrolytes, sulfides have been considered as one of the most promising candidates due to their soft nature and high ionic conductivity. However, the interphase problem between Li metal and sulfide electrolytes has been a concern. As indicated by the density functional theory (DFT) calculations, Li3PO4 and Li3N possess the highest interface energy and the highest interfacial adhesion energy towards Li metal, respectively. A two-step synergistic phosphating process involving the reaction of H3PO4 and LiNO(3 )on the Li surface generates a Li3PO4-Li3N hybrid interphase. The designed interphase with high ionic conductivity and low electronic conductivity exhibits excellent stability against lithium metal. The symmetric cell incorporated with modified Li could cycle over 200 h at a current density of 1 mA cm(-2) and a cut-off capacity of 1 mAh cm(-2). The all-solid-state lithium batteries (ASSLBs) with the modified Li anodes shows good cycling and rate performances. This work provides a perspective of realizing practical modification of lithium metal in ASSLBs.

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