Constriction and Contact Impedance of Ceramic Solid Electrolytes
Source abstract
Abstract
The development of solid-state batteries (SSBs) is hindered by degradation at solid–solid interfaces due to void formation and contact loss, resulting in increased impedance. We systematically investigate the roles of real and unrecoverable interfacial contact areas at the electrode/Li 6 PS 5 Cl interface in driving the impedance rise. By controlling contact geometries and applied pressures, we identify their distinct contributions to the impedance and quantify their influence on the interfacial resistance and transport. Experiments reveal that interfacial resistance follows power law scaling, with exponents of −1 for recoverable contact area and −0.5 to −0.67 for pressure, respectively. Moreover, distributed contacts result in lower impedance due to smaller potential gradients and a more uniform electrical potential distribution. Simulations of the geometries with unrecoverable contact loss predict interfacial resistances in agreement with experiments. Our work highlights the influence of unrecoverable and recoverable contact losses on SSB impedance while quantifying the effectiveness of mitigation strategies.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies · Advanced Battery Technologies Research · Advancements in Battery Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Texas Tech University
Funding
Texas Tech University
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1038/nenergy.2016.14110.1038/nenergy.2016.141 ↗
2. 10.1038/s41578-019-0165-510.1038/s41578-019-0165-5 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.02.03810.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.02.038 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.ensm.2017.05.01310.1016/j.ensm.2017.05.013 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2024.23410610.1016/j.jpowsour.2024.234106 ↗
6. 10.1038/s41560-023-01208-910.1038/s41560-023-01208-9 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.cossms.2022.10100210.1016/j.cossms.2022.101002 ↗
8. 10.1038/s41563-020-00903-210.1038/s41563-020-00903-2 ↗
9. 10.1149/2.0481711jes10.1149/2.0481711jes ↗
10. 10.1002/aenm.20220367110.1002/aenm.202203671 ↗
11. 10.1038/s41563-019-0438-910.1038/s41563-019-0438-9 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.joule.2023.07.02210.1016/j.joule.2023.07.022 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.xcrp.2020.10030110.1016/j.xcrp.2020.100301 ↗
14. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.05600310.1103/PhysRevLett.119.056003 ↗
15. 10.1002/aenm.20190325310.1002/aenm.201903253 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.xcrp.2019.10001210.1016/j.xcrp.2019.100012 ↗
17. 10.1021/acsami.3c0588610.1021/acsami.3c05886 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.ensm.2024.10337810.1016/j.ensm.2024.103378 ↗
19. 10.1016/0013-4686(95)00431-910.1016/0013-4686(95)00431-9 ↗
20. 10.1016/S0167-2738(96)00607-810.1016/S0167-2738(96)00607-8 ↗
21. 10.1016/0022-0728(89)87121-910.1016/0022-0728(89)87121-9 ↗
22. 10.1021/acs.jpclett.1c0293510.1021/acs.jpclett.1c02935 ↗
23. 10.1016/0013-4686(65)87012-810.1016/0013-4686(65)87012-8 ↗
24. 10.1021/acsami.2c0707710.1021/acsami.2c07077 ↗
25. 10.1021/acsami.2c1299110.1021/acsami.2c12991 ↗
26. Slade P. G. · 201710.1201/b15640 ↗
27. 10.1149/1.242400310.1149/1.2424003 ↗
28. Holm R. · 196710.1007/978-3-662-06688-1 ↗
29. 10.1088/0508-3443/17/12/31010.1088/0508-3443/17/12/310 ↗
30. 10.1039/C9TA12889A10.1039/C9TA12889A ↗
31. 10.1038/srep0226110.1038/srep02261 ↗
32. 10.3389/fenrg.2016.0002510.3389/fenrg.2016.00025 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2009.05.02110.1016/j.nucengdes.2009.05.021 ↗
34. 10.1073/pnas.200884111710.1073/pnas.2008841117 ↗
35. Ahmad, Z.; Limon, M. S. R. contact_echem GitHub repository, 2024. https://github.com/ahmad-research-group/contact_echem (accessed 12/30/2024).
36. 10.1038/s41560-022-01186-410.1038/s41560-022-01186-4 ↗
37. 10.1002/advs.20230252110.1002/advs.202302521 ↗
38. 10.1002/aenm.20200094510.1002/aenm.202000945 ↗
39. Llewellyn-Jones F. · 1957
40. 10.1021/acsami.9b0253710.1021/acsami.9b02537 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.triboint.2010.01.02110.1016/j.triboint.2010.01.021 ↗
42. 10.1073/pnas.161573311410.1073/pnas.1615733114 ↗