2016
DOI: 10.1007/s00894-016-3180-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SEI-forming electrolyte additives for lithium-ion batteries: development and benchmarking of computational approaches

Abstract: SEI-forming additives play an important role in lithium-ion batteries, and the key to improving battery functionality is to determine if, how, and when these additives are reduced. Here, we tested a number of computational approaches and methods to determine the best way to predict and describe the properties of the additives. A wide selection of factors were evaluated, including the influences of the solvent and lithium cation as well as the DFT functional and basis set used. An optimized computational method… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
47
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
1
47
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As for Li‐based additives, the LUMO energy, electron affinity (EA), ionization potential (IP) and chemical hardness (η) could be considered as trustworthy descriptors to predict as well as screen these types of additives. [ 267 ] For instance, LUMO and EA describe the thermodynamic ability to accept a new electron and are utilized to evaluate the reduction potential, whereas η is a measure of reaction resistance and can serve as an indicator of the kinetics. [ 267 ] Dipole moment (μ), and the binding energy with a Li cation (BE) were also introduced, showing a higher μ leads to a stronger nonbonding interaction with Li + , whereas weak binding between the additive and the lithium cation ensures the rapid formation of the SEI.…”
Section: Electrode/electrolyte Interphases In Sodium Batteriesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As for Li‐based additives, the LUMO energy, electron affinity (EA), ionization potential (IP) and chemical hardness (η) could be considered as trustworthy descriptors to predict as well as screen these types of additives. [ 267 ] For instance, LUMO and EA describe the thermodynamic ability to accept a new electron and are utilized to evaluate the reduction potential, whereas η is a measure of reaction resistance and can serve as an indicator of the kinetics. [ 267 ] Dipole moment (μ), and the binding energy with a Li cation (BE) were also introduced, showing a higher μ leads to a stronger nonbonding interaction with Li + , whereas weak binding between the additive and the lithium cation ensures the rapid formation of the SEI.…”
Section: Electrode/electrolyte Interphases In Sodium Batteriesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 267 ] For instance, LUMO and EA describe the thermodynamic ability to accept a new electron and are utilized to evaluate the reduction potential, whereas η is a measure of reaction resistance and can serve as an indicator of the kinetics. [ 267 ] Dipole moment (μ), and the binding energy with a Li cation (BE) were also introduced, showing a higher μ leads to a stronger nonbonding interaction with Li + , whereas weak binding between the additive and the lithium cation ensures the rapid formation of the SEI. [ 268 ] In the following, the investigations on the SEI formation on Na°, carbonaceous, and other negative electrodes for Na‐batteries are reviewed, with particular regards to the electrolyte composition, including additives ( Table 9 ).…”
Section: Electrode/electrolyte Interphases In Sodium Batteriesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[8] It should be mentioned that these calculations are able to provide a first estimation but are not able to substitute the experimental proof, unfortunately, due to different mechanisms and effects of the various additive besides the SEI formation. [10] There are also other approaches, which might reveal a potential benefit in assuming additive behavior (e. g. calculating the hardness or other descriptors). [9] Additionally, the results are not necessarily systematic when considering additives from different molecular classes and sphere of activity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…HOMO-LUMO values are straightforward to calculate, but should be taken with care with respect to their physical significance. [10] However, in this case the calculations are more time consuming (e. g. calculation of neutral, anion and cation of an additive) which restricts the usability of screening a huge number of molecules. [10] There are also other approaches, which might reveal a potential benefit in assuming additive behavior (e. g. calculating the hardness or other descriptors).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They used the relative Li + -solvent binding energies from the cluster-continuum calculations in conjunction with the reduction potentials in order to estimate the probability of the solvent/additive to be in the Li + coordination shell and undergoing reduction. Jankowski et al 148 and Borodin 79 examined the accuracy of common quantum methods in predicting these key properties. By combining QC calculations for assessing both the thermodynamic and kinetic effects, Husch and Korth 149 provided a set of descriptors for screening new electrolytes by considering the anode SEI formation and graphite exfoliation, which is named as "redox fingerprint analysis" (RFPA).…”
Section: In Vivo Modification and Design Of The Seimentioning
confidence: 99%