4.8 Article

Dual-Site Doping Strategy for Enhancing the Structural Stability of Lithium-Rich Layered Oxides

Journal

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
Volume 13, Issue 14, Pages 16407-16417

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.1c02020

Keywords

Li-rich layered oxides; voltage decay; oxygen loss; dual-site doping; lithium-ion batteries

Funding

  1. Sichuan Science and Technology Program [2019ZDZX0029]
  2. Postgraduate Innovation Fund Project by Southwest University of Science and Technology [20ycx0016]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study successfully addresses the issues of structural stability and voltage decay in lithium-rich layered oxides through dual-site doping with cerium and boron ions.
Lithium-rich layered oxide (LLO) cathode materials are considered to be one of the most promising next-generation candidates of cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries due to their high specific capacity. However, some inherent defects of LLOs hinder their practical application due to the oxygen loss and structure collapse resulting from intrinsic anion and cation redox reactions, such as poor cycle stability, sluggish Li+ kinetics, and voltage decay. Herein, we put forward a facile synergistic strategy to respond to these shortcomings of LLOs via dual-site doping with cerium (Ce) and boron (B) ions. The doped Ce ions occupy the octahedral sites, which not only enlarge the cell volume but also stabilize the layered framework and introduce abundant oxygen vacancies for LLOs, while B ions occupy the tetrahedral sites in the lattice, which block the migration path of transition metal (TM) ions and reduce the oxygen loss using the strong B-O bond. Based on this dual-site doping effect, after 100 cycles at 1 C, the dual-site doped materials exhibit excellent structural stability with a capacity retention of 91.15% (vs 75.12%) and also greatly suppress the voltage decay in LLOs with a voltage retention of 93.60% (vs 87.83%).

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