4.8 Article

Interfacial Chemistry Effects in the Electrochemical Performance of Silicon Electrodes under Lithium-Ion Battery Conditions

期刊

SMALL
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/smll.202303442

关键词

correlative microscopy; li-ion batteries; scanning probe microscopy; silicon; solid electrolyte interphase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the formation of SEI and (de)lithiation phenomena at silicon electrodes is crucial for improving the performance and longevity of Si-based lithium-ion batteries. However, these processes are still elusive, particularly the role of Si surface termination.
Understanding the solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) formation and (de)lithiation phenomena at silicon (Si) electrodes is key to improving the performance and lifetime of Si-based lithium-ion batteries. However, these processes remain somewhat elusive, and, in particular, the role of Si surface termination merits further consideration. Here, scanning electrochemical cell microscopy (SECCM) is used in a glovebox, followed by secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) at identical locations to study the local electrochemical behavior and associated SEI formation, comparing Si (100) with a native oxide layer (SiOx/Si) and etched with hydrofluoric acid (HF-Si). HF-Si shows greater spatial electrochemical heterogeneity and inferior lithiation reversibility than SiOx/Si. This is attributed to a weakly passivating SEI and irreversible lithium trapping at the Si surface. Combinatorial screening of charge/discharge cycling by SECCM with co-located SIMS reveals SEI chemistry as a function of depth. While the SEI thickness is relatively independent of the cycle number, the chemistry - particularly in the intermediate layers - depends on the number of cycles, revealing the SEI to be dynamic during cycling. This work serves as a foundation for the use of correlative SECCM/SIMS as a powerful approach to gain fundamental insights on complex battery processes at the nano- and microscales.

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