4.7 Article

Well-dispersed sulfur wrapped in reduced graphene oxide nanoscroll as cathode material for lithium-sulfur battery

期刊

JOURNAL OF ELECTROANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 780, 期 -, 页码 19-25

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jelechem.2016.08.040

关键词

Lithium sulfur battery; Cathode; Reduced graphene oxide; Graphene scroll; Porous carbon structure

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education [NRF-2015R1D1A1A01060398]
  2. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning, Republic of Korea, as Global Frontier Project [CISS-012M3A6A6054186]
  3. [NRF2015K2A2A2002209]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For large scale batteries, sulfur is an attractive cathode active material for lithium batteries because of high theoretical capacity of 1675 mA hg(-1). However, severe capacity fading and low conductivity of sulfur are significant challenges for its practical application. Here, we report a facile approach to prepare reduced graphene oxide nanoscroll embedded with well-dispersed sulfur (S/GNSC) through a one-pot oxidation of sulfide and reduction of graphene oxide followed by freeze-casting process to generate graphene nanoscroll. The S/GNSC takes the novel shape of reduced graphene oxide sheet spirally wrapped into one-dimensional tubular structure, which enhances electrochemical performance by acting as physical barrier to prevent polysulfide from dissolving and an effective network to promote electron and Li+ transport during reaction. Therefore, the S/GNSC composite with high sulfur loading of 76 wt% exhibits high initial capacity of 1295 mA h g(-1) and reversible capacity of 744 mA h g(-1) after the 100th cycle at 0.2 degrees C when it is used as a cathode material for lithium-sulfur battery, while the capacity of sulfur loaded on reduced graphene oxide sheet (S/rGO) is continuously fading to 510 mA h g(-1) after the 100th cycle due to the irreversible loss of polysulfide. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
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