A 3D all-solid-state microsupercapacitor with electrodes consisting of activated carbon/polymer electrolyte composite

Bioinspired Interfacial Strengthening Flexible Supercapacitors via Hierarchically Topological Interlocking Strategy

“…Furthermore, as the potential window increased up to 1.6 V, the energy density of the 5.0 MPa IE SMSCs increased to 13.61 μW h cm –2 at a current density of 6.25 mA cm –2 and remained 5.89 μW h cm –2 at 50.0 mA cm –2 , which exhibited much higher electrochemically storing energy properties than traditional activated carbon SMSCs. , The other MSCs based on activated carbon were also compared. As shown in Table , the energy and power densities of our activated carbon based SMSCs were obviously higher than those of the reported carbon based SMSCs fabricated without a metal current collector or enhanced active materials, including 3D graphene SMSCs (0.4 μW h cm –2 at 0.9 mW cm –2 ) and AC SMSCs (2.1 μWh cm –2 at 0.14 mW cm –2 ). , The energy density performance of the SMSCs in this paper is in agreement with those of enhanced activated carbon based SMSCs, including AC/PE SMSCs (4.0 μW h cm –2 at 0.4 mW cm –2 ) and AC/PVA SMSCs (3.9 μW h cm –2 at 0.37 mW cm –2 ) . When both working in 1.0 V, IE SMSCs with hierarchical interlocking structures presented higher energy density and power density than those normal enhanced activated carbon based SMSCs.…”

“…50,51 The energy density performance of the SMSCs in this paper is in agreement with those of enhanced activated carbon based SMSCs, including AC/PE SMSCs (4.0 μW h cm −2 at 0.4 mW cm −2 ) and AC/PVA SMSCs (3.9 μW h cm −2 at 0.37 mW cm −2 ). 11 When both working in 1.0 V, IE SMSCs with hierarchical interlocking structures presented higher energy density and power density than those normal enhanced activated carbon based SMSCs. While working in 1.6 V, the performance of our IE SMSCs is even higher than that of reported AC∥MnO 2 asymmetrical MSCs (8.2 μW h cm −2 at 0.4 mW cm −2 ) and some MSCs with normal 3D structures in aqueous electrolytes.…”

“…Furthermore, as the potential window increased up to 1.6 V, the energy density of the 5.0 MPa IE SMSCs increased to 13.61 μW h cm −2 at a current density of 6.25 mA cm −2 and remained 5.89 μW h cm −2 at 50.0 mA cm −2 , which exhibited much higher electrochemically storing energy properties than traditional activated carbon SMSCs. 11,51 The other MSCs based on activated carbon were also compared. As shown in Table 2, the energy and power densities of our activated carbon based SMSCs were obviously higher than those of the reported carbon based SMSCs fabricated without a metal current collector or enhanced active materials, including 3D graphene SMSCs (0.4 μW h cm −2 at 0.9 mW cm −2 ) and AC SMSCs (2.1 μWh cm −2 at 0.14 mW cm −2 ).…”

“…Several methods have been developed to enhance the adhesion between the active materials and the current collectors. For example, doping some polymer linkers like PE, PTFE, and PVA as adhesives can efficiently increase the adhesion force between the active material and the current collector. , However, the introduction of these reported polymer linkers will influence the conductivity of the active materials inevitably, which will severely degrade the performance of supercapacitors (SCs). − Although the introduction of some specially designed materials such as conductive polymer, carbon nanotube, graphene, and other low-dimension materials also can improve the adhesion between the current collector and the active layer, these strategies are often difficult to replicate and promote, which make them unsuitable for their large-scale standardized application. − …”