4.6 Article

Potential Applications of MoS2/M2CS2 (M = Ti, V) Heterostructures as Anode Materials for Metal-Ion Batteries

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
Volume 125, Issue 19, Pages 10226-10234

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.1c00058

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [52062035, 51861023]
  2. advanced Computing East China Sub-center

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The MoS2/M2CS2 heterostructures were found to be stable and exhibit metallic properties, with low diffusion barriers indicating excellent rate performances for various metal-ion batteries. The theoretical capacities for NIBs/LIBs were significantly higher than for KIBs/MIBs, demonstrating their suitability as anode materials. Additionally, the heterostructures showed promising potential for NIBs with lower open-circuit voltages and higher capacities compared to LIBs.
We designed MoS2/M2CS2 (M = Ti, V) heterostructures and investigated their electrochemical performances to evaluate their possibility to serve as anode materials for metal (Li/Na/K/Mg)-ion batteries (LIBs/NIBs/KIBs/MIBs) by the first-principles method. The results show that the two heterostructures are stable and exhibit metallic properties before or after adsorption of metal ions. The low diffusion barriers (below 0.4 eV) indicate that the two heterostructures have excellent rate performances for the four batteries. The theoretical capacities of heterostructures for NIBs (about 400 mAh/g) or LIBs (about 320 mAh/g) are all much higher than those for KIBs or MIBs. This demonstrates that MoS2/M2CS2 are suitable as anode materials for NIBs/LIBs instead of KIBs/MIBs. Furthermore, the average open-circuit voltages of MoS2/M2CS2 for NIBs are both lower than those for LIBs, and they show higher capacities for NIBs than LIBs, which further manifest that the MoS2/M2CS2 heterostructures are more promising candidates for NIBs.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available