Spectroscopic and Electrochemical Properties of (1-x)[PVA/PVP] : x[MgCl₂

Abstract

Blend polymer electrolytes were prepared with different wt% compositions of [PVA/PVP-MgCl2·6H2O] : x% using solution cast technique. Structural, morphological, vibrational, thermal, and ionic conductivity and electrochemical properties were studied on the prepared polymer films. XRD revealed the crystalline nature of the polymer electrolyte films. The morphology and the degree of roughness of the prepared films were analyzed by SEM. FTIR and Raman studies confirmed the chemical complex nature of the ligands, interlinking bond formation between the blend polymers and the dopant salt. The glass transition temperature (Tg) of polymer electrolytes was confirmed by DSC studies. Ionic conductivity measurements were carried out on the prepared films in the frequency ranging between 5000 Hz and 50000 KHz and found to be maximum (2.42 × 10−4 S/cm) for the prepared film with wt% composition 35PVA/35PVP : 30MgCl2·6H2O at room temperature. The electrochemical studies were also performed on the prepared films. The galvanostatic charge/discharge performance was carried out from 2.9 to 4.4 V for the configuration Mg+/(PVA/PVP + MgCl2·6H2O)/(I2 + C + electrolyte).

Structural, Morphological, Electrical and Electrochemical Properties of PVA: CS-Based Proton-Conducting Polymer Blend Electrolytes

“…This means the current comes solely from electrons, i.e., the entire current is from electrons with no contribution by ions. Based on the ion transfer number values of 0.88 and 0.75 of the two samples, the main contributor of the carrying charge are ions rather than electrons [67]. Therefore, from the TNM measurement it can be concluded that PVCS4 is a preferable system for electrochemical device applications, in particular if the conductivity of the system is maximized to 10 −3 -10 −4 S/cm.…”

Retracted: “Spectroscopic and Electrochemical Properties of 1-x[PVA/PVP] : x [MgCl2{6H2O}] Blend Polymer Electrolyte Films”

“…Following a reassessment of the published figures, the following issues were identified: Figure 1 in [1] with Figure 1 from [2]. In [1], the data is described as X-ray diffraction patterns of pure PVA/PVP blend polymer and with different wt% ratios of MgCl 2 ·6H 2 O, while in [2] the data is described as the X-ray diffraction pattern of PVA/PVP:GO (ii) Figure duplication in Figure 2B in [1] with Figure 2E from [3].…”

“…Following a reassessment of the published figures, the following issues were identified: Figure 1 in [1] with Figure 1 from [2]. In [1], the data is described as X-ray diffraction patterns of pure PVA/PVP blend polymer and with different wt% ratios of MgCl 2 ·6H 2 O, while in [2] the data is described as the X-ray diffraction pattern of PVA/PVP:GO (ii) Figure duplication in Figure 2B in [1] with Figure 2E from [3]. In [1], the data is described as the SEM images of [PVA/PVPMgCl 2 ·6H 2 O]: x% with different wt% compositions, while in [3] the data is described as SEM images of different compositions of [PVP + MgCl 2 6H 2 O]: x%.…”

“…(iii) Figure duplication in Figure 2D in [1] with Figure 3D from [4]. In [1], the data is described as the morphological surface of [PVA/PVPMgCl 2 ·6H 2 O]: x% with different wt% compositions, while in [4], the SEM images are of pure PVP and PVP + MgSO 4 7H 2 O with different wt% ratios…”

“…We also asked the authors institutions to formally investigate. KL University responded to confirm the duplications but informed us that the accurate versions were published in [1], with the errors existing in the other publications; [2][3][4]. The corrections to these articles have since been published at [5][6][7], however, this article is being retracted due to concerns with the data.…”