4.8 Article

Rapid fabrication of thick spray-layer-by-layer carbon nanotube electrodes for high power and energy devices

期刊

ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 888-897

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c2ee23318e

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation Center for Chemical Innovation (CCI) under NSF [CHE-0802907]
  2. Contour Energy Systems
  3. Institute for Soldier Nanotechnology (ISN) at MIT
  4. Division Of Chemistry
  5. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0802907] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rapid fabrication of layer-by-layer (LbL) electrodes is essential to expand their utility in energy storage applications. Herein, we address challenges in developing thick LbL electrodes of multi-wall carbon nanotubes (MWNTs) using conventional dip-and spray-LbL processes, and present a solution to overcome these challenges. The vacuum-assisted spray-LbL process using porous carbon substrates enabled a linear growth of LbL-MWNT electrodes with a 600 time decrease in their fabrication time. This result was attributed to the enhanced surface interactions between MWNTs and substrate via increased surface areas, enhanced capillary forces, physical entrapment in pores, and changes in hydrodynamic drag forces. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) revealed high surface area carbon nanotube networks comprised of individual MWNT's. The spray MWNT electrodes delivered a high gravimetric energy of 100 W h kg(-1) at high gravimetric power of 50 kW kg(-1), which is higher than those of most carbon nanotube electrodes reported. Moreover, the spray MWNT electrodes delivered the highest energy capacity per unit area (up to 300 mu W h cm(-2) at 0.4 mW cm(-2) among the LbL electrodes reported, and showed excellent retention of energy capacity up to 100 mu W h cm(-2) at high power capacity of 200 mW cm(-2). These performance values are higher or comparable to the most advanced battery electrodes for high energy capacity per unit area.

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