2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2022.164812
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Altering the high-temperature stability and thermoelectric properties of Cu1.8S thermoelectric materials by Se incorporation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…13 Cu 1.8 S-based thermoelectric materials are believed not suitable for working at temperatures higher than 300 °C due to high temperature decomposition. 13,22 When we tested the σ of the sample with the main phase of Cu 1.8 S at different temperatures, we found that the σ of the sample decreased sharply over 300 °C, as shown in Figure 5a. From the DSC results in Figure 5b, it can be seen that the sample begins to be exothermic at about 350 °C and significantly exothermic at 400 °C.…”
Section: Thermal Decompositionmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…13 Cu 1.8 S-based thermoelectric materials are believed not suitable for working at temperatures higher than 300 °C due to high temperature decomposition. 13,22 When we tested the σ of the sample with the main phase of Cu 1.8 S at different temperatures, we found that the σ of the sample decreased sharply over 300 °C, as shown in Figure 5a. From the DSC results in Figure 5b, it can be seen that the sample begins to be exothermic at about 350 °C and significantly exothermic at 400 °C.…”
Section: Thermal Decompositionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…It is reported that the Cu 1.8 S material is unstable in an air or nitrogen environment above 300 °C and forms a mixture of Cu 2 O­(SO 4 ) and Cu 2 S, Cu 7 S 4 . In the late 1960s, the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company started to develop TEGs based on Ag-doped Cu 2 Se as the p-type material, while this material experienced sizable weight loss when exposed to heat and current flow, and the reason is believed to be Se evaporation. , The cause of instability of Cu 1.8 S at high temperature is caused by the evaporation of S, similar to Se evaporation in Cu 2 Se. At present, there are few reports on the thermal stability of cuprous sulfide materials.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The large off-stoichiometric number δ of Cu ions in Cu 2−δ X is conducive to maintaining a low Cu chemical potential and inhibiting its migration [18,19]. The experimental results demonstrate that Cu 1.8 S with large δ has good stability [14,20]. Cu 1.8 S remains stable for 72 h when the current density is 48 A cm −2 , whereas Cu 2 S exhibits Cu precipitation and cracks within 12 h when the current density is only 12 A cm −2 [14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Solution processed 300 100 -200 --- [23] Solution processed 300 ~175 653 -- [26] Solution processed 300 --97.8 (x = 0.31) 120 (x = 0.48) - [25] Solution processed 300 ~125 --- [27] Ball milled & printed 300 50 250 (x = 0.10) [22] High-pressure, high-temperature 300 400 450 (x = 0.01) 540 (x = 0.03) [33] High-pressure, high-temperature 325 ~450 (x = 0.8, y = 0.2) ~200 (x = 1, y = 0.2) [18] Mechanical alloying & spark plasma sintering 325 600 270 -490 (15 -5 wt% Cu 2 S) [12] Mechanical alloying & spark plasma sintering 300 140 (x = 0.85) 50 (x = 1) [34] Mechanical alloying & spark plasma sintering 325 ~100 (y = 0.2) [35] Melting-annealing 340 700 -850 750 -- [6] Melting-annealing 300 600 700 450 -650 800 -1000 [9] Melting-annealing 300 -750 ~200 (x = 0.50) 775 -1125 (x < 0.20) [15][16][17] Pulsed laser deposition 325 844 [20] Wet-chemical synthesis, vacuum assisted filtration + cold pressing 300 270 a)…”
Section: Improved Seebeck Coefficient Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although improving performance slightly, doping with elemental tin (Sn) and lithium (Li) did not produce clear improvements in stability. [13,14] Mao et al [9] and Zhao et al [15][16][17] explored sulfur (S) alloying as a route to Cu 2 Se stabilization, and showed that for melt-annealed samples, a slight Cu deficiency (Cu:Se ratio 1.96:1 as compared to stoichiometric 2:1) in combination with up to 20% selenium (Se) substitution with S was favorable both with regards to performance as well as material stability. Zhao et al [15] improved the power factor from ~750 µW m −1 K −2 for Cu 2 Se to ~1125 µW m −1 K −2 for Cu 2 S 0.06 Se 0.94 at 300 K. Mao et al [9] report power factors in the range ~600 µW m −1 K −2 for Cu 2-y Se and Cu 2-y S x Se 1-x and 800 -1000 µW m −1 K −2 for Cu 2 S x Se 1-x at 300 K. Exploring the sulfur-rich regime, Xiang et al [18] added Se to Cu 2-y S and improved the power factor at 325 K from ~200 µW m −1 K −2 for Cu 1.8 S to ~450 µW m −1 K −2 for Cu 1.8 S 0.8 Se 0.2 while reducing material decomposition.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%