1999
DOI: 10.1149/1.1392609
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Toward Reliable Values of Electrochemical Stability Limits for Electrolytes

Abstract: We scrutinized the conventional practice of measuring an electrolyte stability window. It is shown that misleading values might be generated by this practice. Thus, we recommend that to obtain a real stability window, the working electrode material should simulate the electrodes used in a real device. Further, in applications that have a high-surface-area electrode, a new quantification of a stability window is proposed. The electrochemical stability values of various nonaqueous electrolytes that are derived t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

9
276
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 280 publications
(286 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
9
276
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While the onset of reduction occurs at approximately −2.5 V (see Figure 6B), the most commonly used J cut-off value of 1.0 mA/cm 2 predicts for all highly porous carbons unreasonably small cathodic limits in the range of −0.5 to −1.0 V. This is readily explained by the large capacitive current at these high-surface area electrodes. 3,24,38 This problem was also observed by Jow and coworkers, who recommended an alternative method for assessing the electrochemical electrolyte stability at electrodes with high surface areas. 21,24 They proposed an approach according to which the limit of electrochemical electrolyte stability is defined by the voltage at which the faradaic current associated with electrolyte decomposition reaches one ninth of the capacitive current (i.e., 10% of the total current, also referred to as 1/R cut-off ; see Figure 3 in Ref.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…While the onset of reduction occurs at approximately −2.5 V (see Figure 6B), the most commonly used J cut-off value of 1.0 mA/cm 2 predicts for all highly porous carbons unreasonably small cathodic limits in the range of −0.5 to −1.0 V. This is readily explained by the large capacitive current at these high-surface area electrodes. 3,24,38 This problem was also observed by Jow and coworkers, who recommended an alternative method for assessing the electrochemical electrolyte stability at electrodes with high surface areas. 21,24 They proposed an approach according to which the limit of electrochemical electrolyte stability is defined by the voltage at which the faradaic current associated with electrolyte decomposition reaches one ninth of the capacitive current (i.e., 10% of the total current, also referred to as 1/R cut-off ; see Figure 3 in Ref.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Several flaws in using this method to determine the operating voltage of devices have been raised, and alternative approaches explored. [46][47][48][49] As the ESW tends to be asymmetric with respect to the open circuit potential of symmetric EDLCs, the operating potential that can be used without appreciable electrolyte decomposition is often substantially lower than the full ESW. 20 Operating potentials for the symmetric cells used in this work were identified using symmetrical two electrode cells in a manner similar to that employed in previous investigations.…”
Section: Electrochemical Stability Of Ionic Liquidsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The practical EDLC electrodes, however, suffer from a self-discharge at the charged state that is caused by leakage currents. [1][2][3][4][5] This nonideally polarized behavior should thus be minimized to improve the charge-discharge efficiency and reliability of commercial cells.The leakage current appearing in EDLC electrodes can be analyzed using ac impedance spectroscopy. When impedance data are analyzed using the conventional Nyquist plot, the vertical line in the low-frequency region that is observed for ideally polarized electrodes becomes inclined with an increase in the leakage current.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%