4.6 Article

Magnetic field-induced capacitance change in aqueous carbon-based supercapacitors

期刊

CELL REPORTS PHYSICAL SCIENCE
卷 2, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.xcrp.2021.100455

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundations of China [21673263, 21965019]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2017M613248]
  3. Zhaoqing Municipal Science and Technology Bureau [2019K038]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that applying an external magnetic field to carbon-based SCs can induce capacitance change in aqueous acidic and alkaline electrolytes, but not in neutral electrolytes. In KOH electrolytes, the competition between the Lorentz force and the damping force affecting OH- transport under the magnetic field plays a crucial role. In H2SO4 electrolytes, the third paramagnetic force generated by paramagnetic H+ under the magnetic field hinders the H+ transport in addition to other forces.
Carbon-based supercapacitors (SCs) are important electrochemical energy storage devices and are often used in electronic equipment that generates a magnetic field. However, whether the magnetic field affects the charge storage of SCs is unknown. Here, we discover that applying an external magnetic field to carbon-based SCs can induce capacitance change in both aqueous acidic and alkaline electrolytes but not in neutral electrolytes. We further show that, in KOH electrolytes, the competition between the driving force caused by the Lorentz force and the damping force related to the electrolyte conductivity plays a crucial role in affecting the OH- transport under the magnetic field. In H2SO4 electrolytes, the third paramagnetic force generated by the paramagnetic H+ under the magnetic field hinders the H+ transport in addition to the above forces. A quantitative relationship among the limiting current density at the electrode-electrolyte interface, the intensity of the magnetic field, and the concentration and viscosity of electrolytes can therefore be established.

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