4.8 Article

Rational design of an in-situ co-assembly nanocomposite cathode La0.5Sr1.5MnO4+δ-La0.5Sr0.5MnO3-δ for lower-temperature proton-conducting solid oxide fuel cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
卷 466, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.228240

关键词

La0.5Sr1.5MnO4+delta-La0.5Sr0.5MnO3-delta; In situ co-assembly; Interstitial oxygen transfer mode; H-SOFC; Dual-phase nanocomposite

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51802200, 21975163]
  2. Opening Project of CAS Key Laboratory of Materials for Energy Conversion [KF2018002]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M643172]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In response to the exigent topic of exploiting low cost high active electrode materials for proton-conducting solid oxide fuel cells (H-SOFC), a novel strategy using K2NiF4-type layered La0.5Sr1.5MnO4+delta (LSMO4) with interstitial oxygen transfer mode as ionically conductive phase for La1-xSrxMnO3-based cathodes is proposed. With the adoption of one-step in-situ co-assembly method, the 20-40 nm dual-phase equimolar nanocomposite LSMO4- La0.5Sr0.5MnO3-delta (LSMO4-LSM) is obtained at 1000 degrees C, corroborated by the XRD and TEM results. When assembled with the BZCY electrolyte, the LSMO4-LSM cathode possesses much lower area specific polarization resistances in symmetrical cells and better electrochemical performance in single cells than that of the LSM cathode. Correspondingly, the electrode process is changed with the introduction of LSMO4 and an excellent cell performance with the peak power density (PPD) of 936 mW cm(-2) and the interfacial polarization resistance (R-p) of 0.082 Omega cm(2) at 700 degrees C is attained, respectively. On the whole, the extremely tiny particles and competitive cell performance with LSMO4-LSM cathode could illustrate the superiority of the in-situ co-assembly technique combined with the novel strategy, providing new ideas or methods for designing high performance H-SOFC electrode materials.

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

4.8
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