2010
DOI: 10.1149/1.3479551
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improved Performance of All-Solid-State Lithium-Ion Batteries Using Nanosilicon Active Material with Multiwalled-Carbon-Nanotubes as a Conductive Additive

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
47
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
47
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The origin of the interfacial resistance, though still not fully understood, is often attributed to the poor physical interfacial contact, the formation of space charge layers, and/or the formation of interphase layers due to the chemical reactions between the electrolyte and electrode . Although a variety of interfacial processing techniques, such as dynamic pressing, nanosizing, cosintering, screen printing, surface coatings have been attempted to engineer the interfaces between the electrodes and electrolytes, the performances of the solid‐state battery are still much lower than the liquid‐electrolyte based batteries. The limited electrochemical stability of the solid electrolyte is rarely thought to be an issue, since the batteries are cycled within the “wide” stability window of electrolytes measured using the semiblocking electrode …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The origin of the interfacial resistance, though still not fully understood, is often attributed to the poor physical interfacial contact, the formation of space charge layers, and/or the formation of interphase layers due to the chemical reactions between the electrolyte and electrode . Although a variety of interfacial processing techniques, such as dynamic pressing, nanosizing, cosintering, screen printing, surface coatings have been attempted to engineer the interfaces between the electrodes and electrolytes, the performances of the solid‐state battery are still much lower than the liquid‐electrolyte based batteries. The limited electrochemical stability of the solid electrolyte is rarely thought to be an issue, since the batteries are cycled within the “wide” stability window of electrolytes measured using the semiblocking electrode …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among diverse candidates, much attention has been focused on the sulfide‐based SE including Li 10 GeP 2 S 12 (LGPS), β‐Li 3 PS 4 , Li 7 P 3 S 11 , Li 2 S–P 2 S 5 , and argyrodite Li 6 PS 5 X (X = Cl, Br, and I) due to their high ionic conductivity comparable to that of liquid electrolyte as well as better physical contact with other components compared to the oxide‐based SE . In the case of electronic conductivity, not simply carbon‐based materials such as super P, acetylene black (AB), carbon nanotubes (CNTs), vapor grown carbon nanofiber (VGCF) with 0D or 1D shapes, but also metal‐based materials such as TiN and Ni have been used as a conducting agent in the ABBS's cathode electrode. However, even though the addition of conducting agents can improve the electronic conductivity of the composite cathode by forming electronic percolating pathways, the presence of carbon families is likely responsible for unwanted side reactions including the formation of new insulating layer presumably to reduce thermodynamic instability between the carbon and SE during the initial charging process in the sulfide‐based SE .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…were shown to enhance both capacity and cycling stability by forming a more efficient percolation pathway compared that when larger later active additive particles were used [156][157][158][159][160]. It is also found that the amount of conductive additive can have a profound effect on the cycle life of the electrode, which increases with increasing conductive additive content [161].…”
Section: Electrolyte and Electrode Additivesmentioning
confidence: 90%