2020
DOI: 10.1039/c9cp06233e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A strategy for boosting the thermoelectric performance of famatinite Cu3SbS4

Abstract: Co-substitution of Ge and P for Sb in Cu3SbS4 famatinite boosted dimensionless thermoelectric figure of merit.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is worth noting that although many Cu‐based compounds have been intensively optimized for thermoelectric applications, [ 34,36–43 ] most of these studies focus on the diamond‐like structures, for example, chalcopyrite, famatinite, and stannite, which only contain the corner‐sharing Cu X 4 tetrahedra and are certainly not ideal thermoelectric materials in terms of κ L based on our analysis (e.g., the κ L of CuFeS 2 , CuFeSe 2 , CuGaTe 2 , Cu 3 SbS 4 , and Cu 2 ZnSnSe 4 at 300 K are 7.8, 6.5, 6.4, 3.5, and 3.2 Wm −1 K −1 , respectively [ 24,52,53 ] ). To illustrate this, in Figure , we compare the M ‐Se bond lengths and 2 nd IFCs of Cu/Se and Ag/Se compounds with chalcopyrite and ZrCuSiAs‐type structures.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is worth noting that although many Cu‐based compounds have been intensively optimized for thermoelectric applications, [ 34,36–43 ] most of these studies focus on the diamond‐like structures, for example, chalcopyrite, famatinite, and stannite, which only contain the corner‐sharing Cu X 4 tetrahedra and are certainly not ideal thermoelectric materials in terms of κ L based on our analysis (e.g., the κ L of CuFeS 2 , CuFeSe 2 , CuGaTe 2 , Cu 3 SbS 4 , and Cu 2 ZnSnSe 4 at 300 K are 7.8, 6.5, 6.4, 3.5, and 3.2 Wm −1 K −1 , respectively [ 24,52,53 ] ). To illustrate this, in Figure , we compare the M ‐Se bond lengths and 2 nd IFCs of Cu/Se and Ag/Se compounds with chalcopyrite and ZrCuSiAs‐type structures.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experimental data fell on the theoretical line of m * = 4 m 0 at p ≈ 0.5 × 10 21 cm −3 and m * = 5 m 0 at p ≈ 3 × 10 21 cm −3 , where m 0 is the electron rest mass (Figure 4c). The latter value for the enargite Cu 3 P 1− x Ge x S 4 is higher than the m * of 3–4 m 0 for famatinite Cu 3 Sb 1− x − y Ge x P y S 4 [ 44 ] with a ZB‐derivative structure at the same level of p . The heavy m * probably yielded the high S (∝ m * p −2/3 ) even at a high p level (≈10 21 cm −3 ) for Cu 3 P 1− x Ge x S 4 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[27,97] In comparison, the related sphalerite-type tetragonal chalcopyrite CuFeS 2 [72,98] and cubic isocubanite CuFe 2 S 3 [76] exhibit ar elatively high thermal conductivity (Figure 9) that results in ZT values below 0.3 at 673 K. [76] Note that because the Cu/M ratio is below 1, chalcopyrite and isocubanite are ntype materials but the valence band remains mainly composed of Cu 3d and S3 po rbitals.A sf or mohite derivatives, simple doping strategies have been shown to be successful with chalcopyrite, [98] isocubanite, [76] kesterite Cu 2 ZnSnS 4 , [81] stannite Cu 2 FeSnS 4 , [99] and famatinite. [100] Most of the materials used for photovoltaic applications are sphalerite-derivative compounds from group A. Among these widely studied materials,copper tin sulfides (CTS) and kesterite Cu 2 ZnSnS 4 (CZTS) phases are considered very promising due to their efficiencyand being composed of nontoxic, low-cost, and Earth-abundant elements.…”
Section: Structure-property Relationships In Inorganicmentioning
confidence: 99%