Additive Manufacturing of Li‐Ion Batteries: A Comparative Study between Electrode Fabrication Processes

Abstract

Additive manufacturing strategies are gaining more importance in the context of lithium‐ion batteries. The rapid prototyping, reduced waste and complex 3D structures achievable are powerful and attractive tools that are out of the reach of current fabrication techniques. Additionally, thanks to the potential that these manufacturing techniques hold for the fabrication of micro‐energy storage devices, they are gaining increasing attention in the literature. Here, some of the more common additive manufacturing techniques are compared to standard methodologies by systematically evaluating their electrochemical performance and correlating it with the physical changes induced by the printing process. By using LTO/CNT‐based inks, it is observed that the inner arrangement of the conductive additive is significatively altered depending on the technique used and that this has an impact on the rate performance of the device. By using a model that links the capacity‐rate data to the physical properties of the batteries, it is possible to find the limiting factor on the printed electrodes and correlate it with the material arrangement that each technique produces.

Quantitative analysis of printed nanostructured networks using high-resolution 3D FIB-SEM nanotomography

“…Pore connectivity is a key parameter that determines the accessible nanosheet surface area in sensing or electrochemical applications 51,52 . The pore volume in Fig.…”

Materials for 3D Printed Metal and Metal‐Ion Batteries

“…DIW allows the use of a wide variety of active materials and additives [14] . The end composition and microstructure of the electrodes are mostly the same as in the slurry‐based depositions traditionally employed in industrial battery production [15] . The critical aspect of this deposition technique is the ink formulation and its rheological properties.…”

Interface Engineering for 3D Printed Energy Storage Materials and Devices

“…This important avenue from materials to full EESDs can thus be achieved directly during manufacturing approaches, leading to simplified steps and low costs for manufacturing full energy devices. [178][179][180] The interface characteristics between device components become critical for 3DP-ESMDs considering the fact that low interface stability commonly incurs unfavorable interface resistance and poor cycle lifespan. [181] For the three major types of energy storage devices, namely the sandwich-type, in-plane, and fiber-shaped 3D printed ones, the unique design of the electrode and electrolyte configurations with desirable formulas directly affects the interface properties as well as energy storage behaviors, leading to diverse specific [165] Copyright 2020, Royal Society of Chemistry.…”

“…This important avenue from materials to full EESDs can thus be achieved directly during manufacturing approaches, leading to simplified steps and low costs for manufacturing full energy devices. [ 178–180 ] The interface characteristics between device components become critical for 3DP‐ESMDs considering the fact that low interface stability commonly incurs unfavorable interface resistance and poor cycle lifespan. [ 181 ]…”