4.8 Article

Na+/vacancy disordering promises high-rate Na-ion batteries

期刊

SCIENCE ADVANCES
卷 4, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aar6018

关键词

-

资金

  1. Basic Science Center Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China [51788104]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51772301, 21773264]
  3. National Key R&D Program of China [2016YFA0202500]
  4. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA09010100]
  5. SSRF, China
  6. SSRF, China [BL14W1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As one of the most fascinating cathode candidates for Na-ion batteries (NIBs), P2-type Na layered oxides usually exhibit various single-phase domains accompanied by different Na+/vacancy-ordered superstructures, depending on the Na concentration when explored in a limited electrochemical window. Therefore, their Na+ kinetics and cycling stability at high rates are subjected to these superstructures, incurring obvious voltage plateaus in the electrochemical profiles and insufficient battery performance as cathode materials for NIBs. We show that this problem can be effectively diminished by reasonable structure modulation to construct a completely disordered arrangement of Na-vacancy within Na layers. The combined analysis of scanning transmission electron microscopy, ex situ x-ray absorption spectroscopy, and operando x-ray diffraction experiments, coupled with density functional theory calculations, reveals that Na+/vacancy disordering between the transition metal oxide slabs ensures both fast Na mobility (10(-10) to 10(-9) cm(2) s(-1)) and a low Na diffusion barrier (170 meV) in P2-type compounds. As a consequence, the designed P2-Na2/3Ni1/3Mn1/3Ti1/3 O-2 displays extra-long cycle life (83.9% capacity retention after 500 cycles at 1 C) and unprecedented rate capability (77.5% of the initial capacity at a high rate of 20 C). These findings open up a new route to precisely design high-rate cathode materials for rechargeable NIBs.

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