4.6 Article

Optimization of electrophoretic suspension to fabricate Li[Ni1/3Co1/3Mn1/3]O2 based positive electrode for Li-ion batteries

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 95, 期 -, 页码 295-300

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2013.01.102

关键词

Li-ion batteries; Positive electrode; Electrophoretic deposition; Box-Bhenken design

资金

  1. IT R&D program of MKE (Ministry of Knowledge Economy)/KEIT (Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology) [10041856]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A direct deposition technique based on electrophoresis is employed to prepare positive electrode for Li-ion batteries. Li[Ni1/3Co1/3Mn1/3]O-2 (active material), denka black (conductive agent) and PVDF (binder) is dispersed in the solvent and used as a suspension for electrophoretic deposition (EPD) process. The Box-Bhenken design is made to optimize the EPD suspension, by varying three controllable input factors namely weight of active material, conductive agent and binder. The output responses are initial discharge capacity and capacity retention ratio. There is a good agreement between the actual and predicted values. The adequacies of the models are established with analysis of variance. The response surface methodology with desirability function is used to determine the optimum deposition condition to obtain maximum initial discharge capacity and capacity retention ratio for the EPD prepared positive electrode. The developed design predicts the 500 mg of active material, 10 mg of conductive agent and 30 mg of binder as an optimum condition for maximum discharge capacity of 152 mAh/g and capacity retention ratio of 93%. For confirmation, the electrode prepared with these optimum parameters gives discharge capacity of 147.18 mAh/g and capacity retention ratio of 97.11%. EPD process is suggested to be efficient for fabrication of positive electrode under the predicted optimal condition in accordance to the positive electrode prepared by Doctor blade method. (c) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. 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