4.8 Article

Combined physical confinement and chemical adsorption on co-doped hollow TiO2 for long-term cycle lithium-sulfur batteries

期刊

NANOSCALE
卷 14, 期 26, 页码 9401-9408

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d2nr01815b

关键词

-

资金

  1. Special Talents of Scientific Research Project of Guangdong Technical Normal University [2021SDKYA105]
  2. Guangzhou Basic and Applied Basic Research Project
  3. Science and Technology Planning Projects of Guangzhou [201905010007]
  4. Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China [62035006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a nitrogen and sulfur dual doped hollow TiO2 sphere was designed and synthesized as a sulfur host. The results showed that this material can significantly improve the electrochemical properties of lithium-sulfur batteries.
Lithium-sulfur (Li-S) batteries have long been expected to be promising high-energy-density secondary batteries because of their high theoretical specific capacity and element abundances. Yet, their poor cyclability and low rate-capacity strongly limited their practical application. Herein, a nitrogen and sulfur dual doped hollow TiO2 sphere is designed and synthesized for the sulfur host. The dual doped hollow TiO2 can enhance the adsorption ability of soluble lithium polysulfides, which effectively promote the conversion reaction of lithium polysulfides from high-order to low-order in Li-S batteries. What is more, the hollow spherical TiO2 host provides a deposition space for lithium polysulfides and blocks polysulfide migration from the cathode to the electrolyte. Both theoretical calculations and experimental studies confirmed that the electrochemical properties of the sulfur electrode are significantly improved by the dual doped hollow TiO2 sphere. The typical as-prepared dual doped hollow TiO2 cathode coated sulfur has a capacity of 1258 mA h g(-1) for the first discharge and a capacity decay as low as 0.0648% per cycle during 500 cycles with a sulfur loading of 3.8 mg cm(-2).

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