Insights on the cycling behavior of a highly-prelithiated silicon–graphite electrode in lithium-ion cells
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Nanosized silicon materials are being developed for use in the anodes of high-energy lithium-ion batteries. However, the high surface areas of these materials increase the rate of parasitic reactions in the electrode, which consume cyclable Li+ and degrade battery performance. Prelithiation offers a realistic strategy to compensate for this reactivity, by injecting additional charge into the cell to counterbalance the Li+ loss. Interestingly, the benefits offered by prelithiation extend beyond its more obvious purpose. Here, by using a reference electrode in NMC532//Si–Gr cells, we show how prelithiation alters the cycling potentials experienced by the Si-containing anode and how that translates into gains in cycle life. The rate of consumption of the prelithiated charge is lower than that expected from the behavior of non-prelithiated cells. Curiously, the Si particles become partially unresponsive during the C/3 cycling apparently because of kinetic constraints. Electrochemical studies on harvested electrodes in half-cells show that capacities are intact after the long-term cycling and that most of the lithium reservoir is still present in the anode. We conclude that the high capacity retention displayed by the prelithiated cells mainly results from a higher participation of graphite particles during the extended electrochemical cycling.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advancements in Battery Materials · Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies · Advanced Battery Technologies Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. Winter · Chem. Rev. · 2018 · 118 · 1143310.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00422 ↗
2. Myung · ACS Energy Lett. · 2017 · 2 · 19610.1021/acsenergylett.6b00594 ↗
3. Kalaga · Electrochim. Acta · 2018 · 280 · 22110.1016/j.electacta.2018.05.101 ↗
4. Rodrigues · J. Power Sources · 2018 · 395 · 28910.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.05.071 ↗
5. Ababtain · ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces · 2016 · 8 · 1524210.1021/acsami.6b02620 ↗
6. Betz · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2019 · 166 · A353110.1149/2.1221914jes ↗
7. Chevrier · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2018 · 165 · A112910.1149/2.1161805jes ↗
8. Forney · Nano Lett. · 2013 · 13 · 415810.1021/nl401776d ↗
9. Klett · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2016 · 163 · A87510.1149/2.0271606jes ↗
10. Liu · ACS Nano · 2011 · 5 · 648710.1021/nn2017167 ↗
11. Wetjen · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2017 · 164 · A284010.1149/2.1921712jes ↗
12. Vlad · Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. · 2012 · 109 · 1516810.1073/pnas.1208638109 ↗
13. Zhang · J. Power Sources · 2018 · 400 · 54910.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.08.061 ↗
14. Rodrigues · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2019 · 166 · A99610.1149/2.0401906jes ↗
15. Rodrigues · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2018 · 165 · A169710.1149/2.0611809jes ↗
16. Smith · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2012 · 159 · A70510.1149/2.056206jes ↗
17. Wetjen · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2018 · 165 · A150310.1149/2.1261807jes ↗
18. Klett · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2017 · 164 · A609510.1149/2.0131701jes ↗
19. Obrovac · Chem. Rev. · 2014 · 114 · 1144410.1021/cr500207g ↗
20. Yao · Adv. Energy Mater. · 2019 · 910.1002/aenm.201803380 ↗
21. McDowell · Adv. Mater. · 2013 · 25 · 496610.1002/adma.201301795 ↗
22. Bieker · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2015 · 17 · 867010.1039/C4CP05865H ↗
23. Liang · Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. · 2016 · 113 · 286210.1073/pnas.1518188113 ↗