4.7 Article

A Bi-doped Li3V2(PO4)3/C cathode material with an enhanced high-rate capacity and long cycle stability for lithium ion batteries

期刊

DALTON TRANSACTIONS
卷 44, 期 40, 页码 17579-17586

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5dt03225c

关键词

-

资金

  1. China Natural Science Foundation [21501171, 51403209, 51177156, 21406221, 21206158, 21476224, 21406219, 51361135701]
  2. Dalian Municipal Outstanding Young Talent Foundation [2014J11JH131]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bi-doped compounds Li3V2-xBix(PO4)(3)/C (x = 0, 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.07) are prepared by a sol-gel method. The effects of Bi doping on the physical and electrochemical properties of Li3V2(PO4)(3) are investigated. X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis indicates that Bi doping does not change the monoclinic structure of Li3V2(PO4)(3). A detailed analysis of the XRD patterns suggests that Bi3+ ions partly enter into the crystal structure of Li3V2(PO4)(3) and enlarge the lattice volume of Li3V2(PO4)(3). According to the results of cycle and rate performance measurements, moderate Bi3+ doping is beneficial in improving the electrochemical properties of Li3V2(PO4)(3). Among all the samples, Li3V1.97Bi0.03(PO4)(3)/C shows the best cycle and rate performance. At 3.0-4.3 V, the initial discharge capacity of Li3V1.97Bi0.03(PO4)(3)/C is as high as 130 mA h g(-1), close to the theoretical specific capacity of 133 mA h g(-1). The capacity retention of Li3V1.97Bi0.03(PO4)(3)/C is almost 100% after 100 cycles at 3.0-4.3 V. In addition, Li3V1.97Bi0.03(PO4)(3)/C exhibits excellent low-temperature and high-rate performance. Impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and cyclic voltammetry (CV) curves indicate lower charge transfer resistance and a larger Li ion diffusion rate of Li3V1.97Bi0.03(PO4)(3)/C than the primary Li3V2(PO4)(3)/C. The excellent electrochemical performance of Li3V1.97Bi0.03(PO4)(3)/C can be attributed to its larger Li ion diffusion channels, higher electronic conductivity, higher structural stability and smaller particle size.

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