| Literature DB >> 35495225 |
Peng Chen1,2,3, Zexi Wang1, Bingyu Zhang1, Heng Liu1, Wanqiang Liu1,2,3, Jianxun Zhao1,2, Zhihua Ma1,2,3, Wenyue Dong1,2,3, Zhongmin Su1,3.
Abstract
The shutting effect in lithium-sulfur (Li-S) batteries hinders their widespread application, which can be restrained effectively by a modified separator. In this work, a composite of reduced graphene oxide and beta-phase TiO2 nanoparticles (RGO/TiO2(B)) is designed as a separator modification material for improving the electrochemical behavior of Li-S batteries. The TiO2(B) nanoparticles are in situ prepared and tightly adhere to the RGO layer. A series of examinations demonstrated that the RGO/TiO2(B)-coated separator efficiently inhibits the polysulfide shuttling phenomenon by the cooperative effect of physical adsorption and chemical binding. Specifically, as modified separators, a comparison between TiO2(B) and anatase TiO2(A) each composited with RGO has been conducted. The TiO2(B) sample not only exhibits a superior blocking character of migrating polysulfides, but also enhances battery electrochemical kinetics by fast Li ion diffusion. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35495225 PMCID: PMC9049200 DOI: 10.1039/c9ra10185c
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Schematic diagrams of the polysulfide shuttle effect in Li–S batteries using (a) a PP separator and (b) a RGO/TiO2(B)-modified separator. (c) Preparation of the RGO/TiO2(B) nanoarchitectures.
Fig. 2SEM images of the surface of (a) the PP separator, (b) the RGO-modified separator, and (c) the RGO/TiO2(B)-coated separator. (d) Cross-sectional SEM image of the RGO/TiO2(B)-modified separator. Photographs of (e) folded and (f) recovered RGO/TiO2(B)-modified separator.
Fig. 3(a) XRD pattern of TiO2(B). (b) Raman spectra of GO, RGO and RGO/TiO2(B).
Fig. 4(a) The initial charge–discharge curves of PP, RGO, RGO/TiO2(A) and RGO/TiO2(B). (b) Voltage profiles of cycles at growing charge rates. (c) Cyclic performance at 0.2C and the coulombic efficiency for batteries with PP and RGO-, RGO/TiO2(A)- and RGO/TiO2(B)-coated separators. (d) The rate capability of the different batteries.
Fig. 5(a) CV profiles of RGO/TiO2(B). (b) CV profiles of PP, RGO and RGO/TiO2(B) for the first cycle. (c) EIS plots of PP, RGO and RGO/TiO2(B) for before and after cycling. (d and e) Equivalent circuits before and after cycling used to simulate EIS curves.
Fig. 6(a) XPS spectra of surface of RGO/TiO2(B) separator before and after 100 cycles. (b–d) High-resolution XPS survey scans of C 1s, Ti 2p, and S 2p.
Fig. 7SEM images of the cathode-facing surface for (a) RGO/TiO2(B)-coated separator and (b) RGO/TiO2(A)-coated separator after cycling. The SEM and EDX mapping (carbon and sulfur) images of the reverse side anode-facing surface of (c) RGO/TiO2(B)-coated separator and (d) RGO/TiO2(A)-coated separator.
Fig. 8CV profiles of (a) RGO/TiO2(B) and (b) RGO/TiO2(A) at different scan rates. (c) The corresponding linear fits. (d) The lithium ion diffusion coefficient with the RGO/TiO2(B)- and RGO/TiO2(A)-coated separators.
The comparison of the DLi values calculated for the cells with RGO/TiO2(B) and RGO/TiO2(A) coating separator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5.10 × 10−9 | 3.29 × 10−9 | 2.33 × 10−9 | 1.81 × 10−9 | 1.34 × 10−9 | 1.15 × 10−9 |