4.7 Article

Electrochemical capacitance of titanium nitride modified lithium titanate nanotube array

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALLOYS AND COMPOUNDS
卷 725, 期 -, 页码 1-13

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.05.179

关键词

Lithium titanate; Titanium nitride; Supercapacitor; Capacitance

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21373047]
  2. Graduate Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province [KYLX16_0265]
  3. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Titanium nitride modified lithium titanate nanotube array (TiN-Li4Ti5O12 NTA) was designed as the electrode material of lithium-ion supercapacitor for electrochemical energy storage. Li4Ti5O12 NTA was prepared through lithiation treatment of anodic TiO2 NTA and then annealing treatment in argon. TiN-Li(4)Ti(5)O(12)NTA was formed through coating TiO2 sol on the surface of Li4Ti5O12 NTA and then full nitridation treatment in ammonia. Partially nitridized Li4Ti5O12 (N-Li4Ti5O12) NTA was also prepared through a controlled nitridation treatment of Li4Ti5O12 NTA in ammonia. TiN-Li4Ti5O12 NTA with full TiN coating layer exhibited higher conductivity than N-Li4Ti5O12 NTA with partially incorporated TiN. The capacitance accordingly increased from 79.58 F g(-1) for N-Li4Ti5O12 to 143.83 F g(-1) for TiN-Li4Ti5O12 at 0.5 A g(-1) in 0.5 M Li2SO4. The capacitance retention ratio also increased from 72.95% to 82.41% after 1000 cycles at 3.0 A g(-1). The all-solid-state supercapacitor was constructed using TiN-Li4Ti5O12 NTA electrode and polyvinyl alcohol gel electrolyte containing Li2SO4, showing high capacitance of 40.45 F g(-1), energy density of 32.36 Wh kg(-1) and power density of 0.6 kW kg(-1) at the high output voltage of 2.4 V and current density of 0.5 A g(-1). Therefore, TiN-Li4Ti5O12 NTA could act as a feasible electrode material of lithium-ion supercapacitor. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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