4.6 Article

Structure- and porosity-tunable, thermally reactive metal organic frameworks for high-performance Ni-rich layered oxide cathode materials with multi-scale pores

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
卷 7, 期 25, 页码 15190-15197

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c9ta02462j

关键词

-

资金

  1. Hallym University Research Fund [HRF-201810-011]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (MSIP) [NRF-2015R1A5A1037627]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MSIT
  4. Ministry of Science and ICT) [NRF-2019R1F1A1042080]
  5. Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [2015R1A5A1037627] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe for the first time molecular rearrangements in a highly stable and porous Ni-rich layered oxide cathode material (LiNi0.80Co0.15Mn0.05O2, Ni-rich NCM) using a thermally reactive, Co-embedded metal-organic framework (MOF). The thermal decomposition of the MOF on the surface of the active material forms a molecular-level thin layer of CoOx species, which are thought to act as seeds for the dramatic transformation of the surface of the Ni-rich NCM from a layered oxide (R3m) to a more stable spinel-like phase (Fd3m) before cycling and the formation of multi-scale (nano-to-micro) pores in the active particles. These phase transformations and morphology changes are associated with a galvanic replacement reaction between Co ions from the MOF and Ni ions near the surface of Ni-rich NCM, where some of the Ni ions migrate to the neighboring vacant Li sites by the diffusion of Co ions through melted residual lithium. Therefore, the resultant Co-/Ni-rich surface domains with a more stable spinel-like phase as well as a porous microstructure improve the cyclability and thermal stability of the MOF-inspired Ni-rich NCM.

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