| Title |
Tailoring deposition and morphology of discharge products towards high-rate and long-life lithium-oxygen batteries
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms3438 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ji-Jing Xu, Zhong-Li Wang, Dan Xu, Lei-Lei Zhang, Xin-Bo Zhang |
| Abstract |
Lithium-oxygen batteries are an attractive technology for electrical energy storage because of their exceptionally high-energy density; however, battery applications still suffer from low rate capability, poor cycle stability and a shortage of stable electrolytes. Here we report design and synthesis of a free-standing honeycomb-like palladium-modified hollow spherical carbon deposited onto carbon paper, as a cathode for a lithium-oxygen battery. The battery is capable of operation with high-rate (5,900 mAh g ⁻¹ at a current density of 1.5 A g⁻¹) and long-term (100 cycles at a current density of 300 mA g⁻¹ and a specific capacity limit of 1,000 mAh g⁻¹). These properties are explained by the tailored deposition and morphology of the discharge products as well as the alleviated electrolyte decomposition compared with the conventional carbon cathodes. The encouraging performance also offers hope to design more advanced cathode architectures for lithium-oxygen batteries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 154 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 60 | 38% |
| Researcher | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Professor | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 12% |
| Unknown | 22 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 48 | 30% |
| Materials Science | 24 | 15% |
| Engineering | 19 | 12% |
| Chemical Engineering | 10 | 6% |
| Energy | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 10% |
| Unknown | 34 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2013.
All research outputs
#18,348,542
of 22,723,682 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#43,883
of 46,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,024
of 201,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#332
of 370 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,723,682 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 46,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.5. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 201,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 370 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.