4.6 Article

Self-Supported Amorphous-Edge Nickel Sulfide Nanobrush for Excellent Energy Storage

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 255, 期 -, 页码 153-159

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2017.09.162

关键词

Supercapacitors; Sulfurization; AENSNB electrode; Pseudocapacitive material

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundations of China [21576056, 21576057]
  2. Guangdong Natural Science Foundation [2014A030313520, 2017A030311016]
  3. Science and Technology Research Project of Guangdong Province [2016A010103043]
  4. Guangdong University [2016KTSCX107]
  5. Science and Technology Research Project of Guangzhou [201607010232, 201607010198, 201607010263]
  6. Guangzhou University [BJ201704]
  7. High Level University Construction Project (Regional Water Environment Safety and Water Ecological Protection)
  8. Australian Research Council (ARC) [DE150101306, LP160100927]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transition metal sulfides, which attract great attention as pseudocapacitance electrodes with high specific capacitance exceeding those of traditional metal oxides, but still suffer from relatively low activity and inferior cycling life. Herein, freestanding and hierarchical nickel sulfide (NiS) electrodes with amorphous-edge and nanobrush structures (AENSNB) are successfully prepared based on the self-sacrificial nickel foam as Ni resource and a facile sulfurization process. Benefiting from the merits of amorphous-edge, hierarchical and self-growth architectures, the AENSNB electrode shows greatly improved electrochemical performance with high capacitance (5.59 F cm(-2) at 10 mA cm(-2)). More importantly, it also exhibits a long cycling stability possessing 94.9% capacitance retention after 10000 cycles. The hybrid architecture design for crystalline NiS covered by amorphous edges can be deemed as an effective method to gain pseudocapacitive material for supercapacitors with good conductivity, long cycle life and excellent electrochemical activity. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.6
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