Zn Stripping and Plating Behavior in ZnSO<sub>4</sub>, Zn(ClO<sub>4</sub>)<sub>2</sub>, and ZnCl<sub>2</sub> as a Function of Current Density and Capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zinc-ion batteries (ZIBs), as a promising solution for stationary electricity storage, are receiving significant attention. However, challenges at the zinc electrode, such as dendrite formation, the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) and by-product formation, severely restrict the cyclability and practical application of ZIBs. Understanding the stripping and plating behavior of zinc in different electrolytes may help reveal the root causes and aid in solving these issues while providing solutions. ZnSO4, ZnCl2 and Zn(ClO4)2 are common aqueous electrolytes for ZIBs and are evaluated in this study. The objective is to explore the stripping and plating mechanisms of Zn in the three electrolytes under various current densities (0.5 to 5 mA cm-2) and areal capacities (0.5 to 5 mAh cm-2). Characterization techniques, such as electrochemical testing, electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction (XRD), along with theoretical simulations, including density functional theory (DFT) and molecular dynamics, are employed to investigate the mechanisms during cycling. Preliminary results indicate that Zn tends to deposit on protruding surface features for all three electrolytes, with the morphology of the plated zinc depending on the test conditions. Differences in by-product morphology, the adhesion of plated zinc to the zinc electrode, the amount of by-product formation and zinc stripping behavior in the electrolytes are assessed. The by-products formed on cycled Zn electrodes in all three electrolytes have a plate-like shape; the by-products are thicker for plating/stripping in ZnCl2 compared with ZnSO4 and Zn(ClO4)2. There is better adhesion of by-products to the metal surface for plating/stripping in Zn(ClO4)2. DFT simulations show that SO4 2- has a higher adsorption energy on the zinc surface compared with ClO4 2- and Cl-, indicating a lower likelihood of water-induced side reactions in ZnSO4. Additionally, a larger proportion of zinc plated during a previous plating cycle is stripped during the subsequent stripping reaction in ZnSO4 and ZnCl2.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".