4.6 Article

Enhanced Li-S battery performance based on solution-impregnation-assisted sulfur/mesoporous carbon cathodes and a carbon-coated separator

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
卷 5, 期 12, 页码 5750-5760

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7ta01161j

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [2014R1A1A2057691, 2014H1C1A1073093]
  2. Human Resource Training Program for Regional Innovation and Creativity through the Ministry of Education
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2014H1C1A1073093, 2014R1A1A2057691] 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

The widespread use of lithium-sulfur (Li-S) batteries is still hindered by the low electrochemical activity of sulfur-species, and a short cycle life owing to anode instability coupled with polysulfide shuttle effects. As a first measure to counteract these issues, a new and simple sulfur-loading method consisting of solution impregnation and subsequent melt-diffusion (IM) is demonstrated and compared to the conventional method of physical mixing followed by melt-diffusion (PM). Using the IM method, sulfur is well encapsulated and highly dispersed in conducting mesoporous carbons (MCs) that possess an ideal pore diameter (around 10 nm) and a large pore volume (similar to 2.8 cm(3) g(-1)). S/MC cathodes prepared by the IM method deliver much higher capacities, better rate responses and cycling stabilities up to 300 cycles (the fading rate was as low as -0.037% per cycle) with less concerns in lithium polysulfide (LPS) shuttling and impedance build up than S/MC cathodes prepared by the PM method. The S/MC cathodes prepared by the IM method has a pseudo-optimum sulfur content of 65 wt%, and when coupled with a new type of carbon-coated separator (CCS), a high areal capacity of >2.5 mA h cm(-2) is successfully achieved, combined with excellent cycling stability and rate capability.

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