4.6 Article

The Effect of Vanadium on Physicochemical and Electrochemical Performances of LiFePO4 Cathode for Lithium Battery

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ELECTROCHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 158, 期 1, 页码 A26-A32

出版社

ELECTROCHEMICAL SOC INC
DOI: 10.1149/1.3514688

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [50632040, 50802049]
  2. Shenzhen Technical Plan Project [JP200806230010A, SG200810150054A]
  3. Guangdong Province Innovative RD Team Plan
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [20100470180]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The phase compositions of the LiFePO4-based cathode materials upon varying the adding amount of vanadium x from 0 to 0. 13 are systemically investigated. A corresponding concentration-composition phase diagram is presented, and the x-dependent variations in the physiochemical and electrochemical performances are systemically analyzed. In the whole concentration range, the chemical valence of Fe2+ remains invariant whereas the valence of vanadium evolves from +4 to +3. With the increase of adding amount of vanadium, the electrical conductivity of samples varies nonlinearly as an N shape while the lithium ion diffusion coefficient first increases and then decreases. The doping of vanadium (x <= 0.07) is beneficial to refine the particle size and increase the electrical conductivity. Upon doping, the reversibility of the electrochemical reaction and the rate capability are monotonically enhanced. The conductive VO2(B) modifies the interface property of nanoparticles, and the sample achieves the high power density without sacrificing the energy density due to pesudocapacitive behavior. The formation of Li3V2(PO4)(3) (x >= 0.11) is more beneficial to improve the rate capacity of the LiFePO4-based cathode, although it undermines the lithium-ion transport of the main phase. By optimizing the content of Li3V2(PO4)(3), excellent rate capacity and high specific capacity can be achieved. (C) 2010 The Electrochemical Society.[DOI: 10.1149/1.3514688] All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据