4.6 Article

High-performance SiGe anode materials obtained by dealloying a Sr-modified Al-Si-Ge eutectic precursor

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 2672-2679

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d2ra07674h

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alloying Si with Ge enhances its electrochemical performance, leading to higher efficiency Li-ion batteries. In this study, Sr was added to the Al-Si-Ge eutectic ribbons as a modifier, resulting in porous coral-like SiGe particles with numerous fibrous branches. The Sr-modified SiGe anode exhibited excellent capacity of 1166.6 mA h g(-1) at 0.1 A g(-1) after 100 cycles, along with a fantastic initial coulombic efficiency of 83.62%. Additionally, it showed superior rate performance with a reversible capacity of 675.3 mA h g(-1) at a current density of 8 A g(-1). This research demonstrates that modification treatments commonly used in metallurgy hold promise for synthesizing high-performance battery electrodes and other energy storage materials.
In exploring the anode materials for high efficiency Li-ion batteries, it has been found that the electrochemical performance of Si can be enhanced via alloying with Ge. In the present work, we modified the Al-Si-Ge eutectic ribbons as the precursor by adding a trace of Sr to the alloy. The SiGe particles obtained by dealloying the Al-Si-Ge eutectic precursor have a porous coral-like nano-architecture with numerous fibrous branches towards various directions. Because of the large surface area and porosity, the as-prepared Sr-modified SiGe anode delivers an excellent capacity of 1166.6 mA h g(-1) at 0.1 A g(-1) after 100 cycles with a fantastic initial coulombic efficiency of 83.62%. Besides, it has a superior rate performance with a reversible capacity of 675.3 mA h g(-1) at the current density of 8 A g(-1). It is demonstrated that the modification treatment that is widely used in metallurgy is also a promising strategy to synthesize high-performance battery electrodes and other energy storage 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

4.6
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