4.5 Article

Prediction of erbium-nitrogen compounds as high-performance high-energy-density materials

期刊

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/aca861

关键词

predictions; erbium-nitrogen compounds; materials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Researchers have reported several stable phases of erbium-nitrogen compounds ErN(x) as high-energy-density materials. Phase diagrams of stable high-pressure structures Immm-ErN2, C2-ErN3, P(sic)4, and P(sic)6 are theoretically studied, and the N-N bonds in these compounds are stabilized as diatomic quasi-molecule N-2, helical-like nitrogen chains, armchair nitrogen chains, and armchair-anti-armchair nitrogen chains, respectively. The P(sic)6 phase exhibits excellent stability at high temperatures up to 1000K and outstanding explosive performance with a high-energy-density of 1.30 kJ g(-1), detonation velocity of 10.87 km s(-1), and detonation pressure of 812.98 kbar, showing promising prospects as high-energy-density materials.
To explore high-energy-density materials, intense attention has been focused on how to stabilize the N-N bond in nitrogen-rich compounds. Here, we report several stable phases of erbium-nitrogen compounds ErN (x) as high-energy-density materials. Specifically, the phase diagrams of stable high-pressure structures Immm-ErN2, C2-ErN3, P (sic) 4, and P (sic)6, are theoretically studied by combining first-principles calculation with particle swarm optimization algorithm. In these erbium-nitrogen compounds, the N-N bonds are stabilized as diatomic quasi-molecule N-2, helical-like nitrogen chains, armchair nitrogen chains, and armchair-anti-armchair nitrogen chains, respectively. Among them, the P (sic)6 harbors excellent stability at high thermal up to 1000 K. More importantly, the P (sic)6 has outstanding explosive performance with high-energy-density of 1.30 kJ g(-1), detonation velocity of 10.87 km s(-1), and detonation pressure of 812.98 kbar, which shows its promising application prospect as high-energy-density materials.

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

4.5
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