4.8 Article

Atomistic Assessments of Lithium-Ion Conduction Behavior in Glass-Ceramic Lithium Thiophosphates

Journal

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages 13-18

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.8b17524

Keywords

glass-ceramic; molecular dynamics; interatomic potentials; sulfide electrolyte; lithium thiophosphate

Funding

  1. Energy Efficiency & Resources Core Technology Program of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) via the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy, Republic of Korea [20152020106100]
  2. Dual Use Technology Program of the Institute of Civil Military Technology Cooperation via the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy and Defense Acquisition Program Administration [17-CM-EN-11]
  3. Technology Development Program to Solve Climate Changes of the National Research Foundation (NRF) - Ministry of Science and ICT [2017M1A2A2044482]
  4. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [20152020106100] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We determined the interatomic potentials of the Li-[PS43-] building block in (Li2S)(0.75)(P2S5)(0.25) (LPS) and predicted the Li-ion conductivity (sigma(Li)) of glass-ceramic LPS from molecular dynamics. The Li-ion conduction characteristics in the crystalline/interfacial/glassy structure were decomposed by considering the structural ordering differences. The superior sigma(Li) of the glassy LPS could be attributed to the fact that similar to 40% of its structure consists of the short-ranged cubic S-sublattice instead of the hexagonally close-packed gamma-phase. This glassy LPS has a sigma(Li) of 4.08 X 10(-1) mS cm(-1), an improvement of similar to 100 times relative to that of the gamma-phase, which is in agreement with the experiments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available