4.7 Article

TiO2-Coated MoO3 Nanorods for Lithium/Sodium-Ion Storage

期刊

ACS APPLIED NANO MATERIALS
卷 6, 期 21, 页码 19876-19886

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsanm.3c03672

关键词

lithium-ion batteries(LIBs); MoO3; TiO2; core-shell; MoO3@TiO2; sodium-ion batteries (SIBs); NCM811; full cell

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Researchers have developed a hybrid composite by coating MoO3 nanorods with TiO2, significantly improving the cycling stability and electrochemical performance in Li/Na-ion batteries. The optimized electrode achieves impressive capacity and cycling performance in both lithium-ion and sodium-ion batteries.
Molybdenum trioxide (MoO3) shows promise as an anode material for Li/Na-ion batteries due to its low cost and high capacity. However, it suffers from poor cycling stability and volume expansion during charging and discharging, which affects its performance. To overcome these issues, researchers have developed a unique hybrid composite by coating MoO3 nanorods with TiO2, creating MoO3@TiO2 core-shell nanorods. The TiO2 coating significantly improves the composite's cycling stability, rate capability, and overall electrochemical performance in Li/Na-ion batteries. The optimized electrode (MoO3@TiO2-2) achieves an impressive capacity of 1259.4 mA h g(-1) after 500 cycles at 200 mA g(-1) and a discharge capacity of 693.3 mA h g(-1) after 1000 cycles at 2000 mA g(-1) in lithium-ion batteries. In sodium-ion batteries, they show high reversible discharge capacities of 499.1 and 389.3 mA h g(-1) after 500 cycles at 100 and 200 mA g(-1), respectively. Moreover, even after 1200 cycles at 2 A g(-1), the electrode retains a capacity of 300.2 mA h g(-1). When combined with an NMC811 cathode in a full-cell Li-ion battery, the composite exhibits excellent cycling performance, lasting over 150 cycles with a capacity of 200 mA h g(-1). This research has significant implications for the development of high-performance rechargeable batteries for various electrochemical energy applications.

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