4.8 Article

In Situ Atomic Force Microscopy Study of Initial Solid Electrolyte Interphase Formation on Silicon Electrodes for Li-Ion Batteries

期刊

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
卷 6, 期 9, 页码 6672-6686

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/am500363t

关键词

solid electrolyte interphase (SEI); atomic force microscopy (AFM); Si anode; Li-ion battery

资金

  1. GM-Brown Collaborative Research grant
  2. NSF [CMMI-1000822, DMR-0520651, DMR-0805172]
  3. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  4. Batteries for Advanced Transportation Technologies (BATT) Program [7056410]
  5. US Department of Education through GAANN [P200A090076]
  6. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  7. Directorate For Engineering [1000822] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Precise in situ atomic force microscopy (AFM) is used to monitor the formation of the solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) on Si electrodes. The stability of these passivation films on negative electrodes is critically important in rechargeable Li-ion batteries, and high capacity materials such as Si present substantial challenges because of the large volume changes that occur with Li insertion and removal. The results reported here show that the initial rapid SEI formation can be stabilized before significant Li insertion into the Si begins and that the rate at which this occurs varies significantly with the nature of the surface. The initial cycling conditions also have a substantial impact on the SEI that forms, with faster rates leading to a smoother, thinner SEI film. To quantitatively interpret the SEI measurements, irreversible expansion of the Si during the first cycle was also monitored in situ with specifically designed specimen configurations. On the basis of the experimental results, relatively simple models were also used to describe the initial formation and stabilization of the SEI and to describe the relationship between the SEI thickness and expected SEI degradation mechanisms.

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