| Literature DB >> 29288337 |
Allan Daraghmeh1,2,3, Shahzad Hussain4,5, Iyad Saadeddin6, Llorenç Servera7, Elena Xuriguera4,5, Albert Cornet4,5, Albert Cirera4,5.
Abstract
Symmetric supercapacitors are fabricated by carbon nanofibers (CNF) and activated carbon (AC) using similar proportions of 7 wt% polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer binder in an aqueous electrolyte. In this study, a comparison of porous texture and electrochemical performances between CNFs and AC based supercapacitors was carried out. Electrodes were assembled in the cell without a current collector. The prepared electrodes of CNFs and AC present Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) surface area of 83 and 1042 m2/g, respectively. The dominant pore structure for CNFs is mesoporous while for AC is micropore. The results showed that AC provided higher specific capacitance retention up to very fast scan rate of 500 mV/s. AC carbon had a specific capacitance of 334 F/g, and CNFs had 52 F/g at scan rate 5 mV/s in aqueous solution. Also, the results indicate the superior conductivity of CNFs in contrast to AC counterparts. The measured equivalent series resistance (ESR) showed a very small value for CNFs (0.28 Ω) in comparison to AC that has an ESR resistance of (3.72 Ω). Moreover, CNF delivered higher specific power (1860 W/kg) than that for AC (450 W/kg). On the other hand, AC gave higher specific energy (18.1 Wh/kg) than that for CNFs (2 Wh/kg).This indicates that the AC is good for energy applications. Whereas, CNF is good for power application. Indeed, the higher surface area will lead to higher specific capacitance and hence higher energy density for AC. For CNF, lower ESR is responsible for having higher power density.Both CNF and AC supercapacitor exhibit an excellent charge-discharge stability up to 2500 cycles.Entities:
Keywords: Activated carbon; Aqueous electrolyte; BET; Carbon nanofibers; SEM; Supercapacitor; TEM
Year: 2017 PMID: 29288337 PMCID: PMC5747563 DOI: 10.1186/s11671-017-2415-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Fig. 1SEM images and TEM images (inset) for a CNFs and b AC
Fig. 2Nitrogen adsorption/desorption isotherms, a CNFs and b AC. BET surface area c CNFS and d AC
Physicochemical parameters of CNFs and AC
| Pore size distribution |
| |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample | BETa, m2/g |
|
|
|
|
| 0.5–2g | 0.2–0.5g | 2–50g | > 50g | APS, nm | Ext, m2/g |
| CNFs | 83 | 0.39 | 0.07 | – | 0.23 | 0.09 | 17.9 | – | 59 | 23 | 4–7.5 | 157.4 |
| AC | 1042 | 0.582 | 0.19 | 0.32 | 0.072 | – | 33 | 55 | 12 | – | 0.47 | 21 |
aBET surface area
bSingle-point volume adsorption total volume of pores at P/P 0 = 0.9932
cSupermicro volume from 0.5 and 2 nm t-plot, y-intercept
dUltramicro volume from MP method
eMeso volume from BJH method
fVolume greater than 50 nm by BJH method
gThe micro and meso percentage calculated by V MICR/V TOTAL × 100%, V MESO/V TOTAL × 100%, APS (average pore size), EXT (external area) from the slope of t-plot
Fig. 3Pore size distribution. a CNFs by BJH method. b AC by MP method
Fig. 4a, b CVs of CNFs and AC, respectively, at 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 150, and 500 mV/s scan rates; c, d specific capacitance comparison at different scan rates; e, f CVs of CNFs and AC, respectively, from 1st to 100th cycle
Fig. 5a GCD curves at different current densities of CNFs. b GCD curves at different current densities of AC
Fig. 6a Specific capacitance comparison from discharge curve of GCD. b Ragone plot of specific power against specific energy for CNFs and AC. c Cycling stability of CNFs and AC
Fig. 7a Nyquist plot of CNFs and AC. b Csp comparison calculated from EIS.
Fig. 8a The real and b imaginary parts are plotted as a function of log of frequency and c phase shift as function of frequency for AC and CNFs