4.6 Article

Electrochemical performance of a nickel-rich LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 cathode material for lithium-ion batteries under different cut-off voltages

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12613-017-1413-6

关键词

lithium-ion batteries; cathodic materials; calcination; electrochemical properties

资金

  1. NSAF [U1530155]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) of China
  3. US-China Collaboration on Cutting-edge Technology Development of Electric Vehicle
  4. Nation Key Basic Research Program of China [2015CB251100]
  5. Beijing Key Laboratory of Environmental Science and Engineering [20131039031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A spherical-like Ni0.6Co0.2Mn0.2(OH)(2) precursor was tuned homogeneously to synthesize LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 as a cathode material for lithium-ion batteries. The effects of calcination temperature on the crystal structure, morphology, and the electrochemical performance of the as-prepared LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 were investigated in detail. The as-prepared material was characterized by X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, laser particle size analysis, charge-discharge tests, and cyclic voltammetry measurements. The results show that the spherical-like LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 material obtained by calcination at 900A degrees C displayed the most significant layered structure among samples calcined at various temperatures, with a particle size of approximately 10 mu m. It delivered an initial discharge capacity of 189.2 mAhaEuro cent g(-1) at 0.2C with a capacity retention of 94.0% after 100 cycles between 2.7 and 4.3 V. The as-prepared cathode material also exhibited good rate performance, with a discharge capacity of 119.6 mAhaEuro cent g(-1) at 5C. Furthermore, within the cut-off voltage ranges from 2.7 to 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 V, the initial discharge capacities of the calcined samples were 170.7, 180.9, and 192.8 mAhaEuro cent g(-1), respectively, at a rate of 1C. The corresponding retentions were 86.8%, 80.3%, and 74.4% after 200 cycles, respectively.

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