4.8 Article

Copper Sulfide (CuxS) Nanowire-in-Carbon Composites Formed from Direct Sulfurization of the Metal-Organic Framework HKUST-1 and Their Use as Li-Ion Battery Cathodes

期刊

ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS
卷 28, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201800587

关键词

carbon materials; copper sulfides; lithium-ion batteries; metal-organic framework; nanocomposites

资金

  1. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) under the Principal Investigator Program [11- PI-1148]
  2. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) [13/RP/B2549, 11-PI-1148]
  3. Enterprise Ireland [CF20144014]
  4. Irish Research Council through the Government of Ireland Postgraduate Scheme
  5. Irish Research Council [GOIPG/2016/1265]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Li-ion batteries containing cost-effective, environmentally benign cathode materials with high specific capacities are in critical demand to deliver the energy density requirements of electric vehicles and next-generation electronic devices. Here, the phase-controlled synthesis of copper sulfide (CuxS) composites by the temperature-controlled sulfurization of a prototypal Cu metal-organic framework (MOF), HKUST-1 is reported. The tunable formation of different CuxS phases within a carbon network represents a simple method for the production of effective composite cathode materials for Li-ion batteries. A direct link between the sulfurization temperature of the MOF and the resultant CuxS phase formed with more Cu-rich phases favored at higher temperatures is further shown. The CuxS/C samples are characterized through X-ray diffraction (XRD), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), transmission electron microscopy, and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) in addition to testing as Li-ion cathodes. It is shown that the performance is dependent on both the CuxS phase and the crystal morphology with the Cu1.8S/C-500 material as a nanowire composite exhibiting the best performance, showing a specific capacity of 220 mAh g(-1) after 200 charge/discharge cycles.

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

4.8
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