MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116198157 · doi:10.1149/ma2020-022273mtgabs

In Operando Mechanistic Elucidation of Graphite-Silicon Anode Interfaced with Amorphous Carbon for Advanced Lithium-Ion Batteries

2020· article· en· W3116198157 on OpenAlexaff
Mihit H. Parekh, Anton D. Sediako, Ali Naseri, Murray J. Thomson, Vilas G. Pol

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceAnodeSiliconGraphiteNanotechnologyAmorphous carbonLithium (medication)Carbon fibersChemical engineeringAmorphous solidComposite numberElectrodeMetallurgyComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has always been a huge thrust in developing, inventing, or fabricating new materials for the anode, having high capacity with long cycle stability. After the failure of the Holy Grail lithium metal anode, in the 1990s, graphite captured the lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) market and has been its mainstay for the past three decades. However, because of limited theoretical capacity (372 mAh g−1), alloy materials like Ge, Si, Sb and Sn garnered a great amount of attention owing to their high extravagant theoretical capacity. Amongst all, silicon is considered the likely promising candidate for the next generation LIBs, however significant challenges (e.g. electrode pulverization, volume expansion, particle fragmentation, excessive solid electrolyte interface formation etc.) need to be addressed for achieving long stable cycle life. Different approaches to overcome the aforementioned issues have been tried for better handling of stress built up on account of volume changes, which include designing nanostructures, or nanocomposites. Despite promising electrochemistry performance, critical problems need to be addressed viz., uneconomical and complex processes, accelerated side reactions due to the high surface area, low tap density, and poor scalability. To tackle these complex issues, we designed a novel silicon-graphite anode interfaced with amorphous carbon derived from inexpensive starch. The presence of amorphous carbon helps accommodate the volume expansion along with enhanced electrical conductivity between Si nanoparticles and graphite particles. The synthesis process for silicon composite (GCSi) composite utilizes a pyrolysis technique, which can be easily scaled up, in an inert environment by homogeneously ball-milling Si-NPs, starch powder, and graphite. The fabricated composite material formation was mechanistically elucidated utilizing in-situ high-resolution environmental transmission electron microscopy (ETEM) as a function of temperature. Temperature ramping up was conducted from 40°C to 500°C at 0.2°C sec-1 with image-capturing every 5 minutes. The dehydrogenation and carbonization of the starch started around at 400℃ and finished about 500℃. With the homogenization of starch particles, they appeared to merge with the graphite. The inner structural homogenization and transition from coarser particles to the uniform continuum of surface further concurred from the BF images of the composite cross-section and the Secondary Electron recording, respectively. The tailored GCSi composite architecture comprising of 25 wt% Si-NPs delivered a high initial discharge capacity of 1126 mAh g−1 with 83% initial coulombic efficiency, while retaining 448 mAh g−1 specific capacity after 100 cycles, cycled at 500 mA g-1. Safety aspects of the GCSi electrode were observed using Multiple Module Calorimetry (MMC), whose unique capabilities allow for the in situ measurement of heat changes during electrochemical reactions of the cells and the study of thermal runaway events. For the measurement, the full cells (with lithium cobalt oxide cathode) were charged from room temperature to 300°C at 0.5°C min-1 rate and the thermal signatures were analyzed. Comparing the energy released during thermal runaway, per specific capacity of the full cell, LCO – GCSi cell released 20.89 kJ Ah-1, which is slightly lesser than 21.56 kJ Ah-1 of LCO – graphite cell. It appears that the novel silicon composite may be slightly safer to use as anode rather than graphite.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207