Promotion of Interface Fusion of Solid Polymer Electrolyte and Cathode by Ultrasonic Vibration
"> Figure 1
<p>The ultrasonic fusion mold.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>AC impedance spectroscopy of the cathode symmetric batteries.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Main effects plot: the effect of each factor on the interface resistance.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>DC polarization test curves of solid polymer electrolyte.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>The linear sweep voltammetry curves of the Ultrasonic Group at different temperatures.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Interface temperature during ultrasonic fusion.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Electrolyte/cathode interface morphologies from: (<b>a</b>) Hot-pressed Group, 2000×; (<b>b</b>) Ultrasonic Group, 2000×; (<b>c</b>) Hot-pressed Group, 10,000×; (<b>d</b>) Ultrasonic Group, 10,000×.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Surface morphologies of the electrolyte from: (<b>a</b>) prepared; (<b>b</b>) Reference Group; (<b>c</b>) Hot-pressed Group; (<b>d</b>) Ultrasonic Group.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>FTIR test results of the electrolyte and the cathode.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.2. Experimental Method
2.2.1. Preparation of Solid Polymer Electrolyte
2.2.2. Preparation of LiFePO4 Cathode
2.2.3. Ultrasonic Fusion Method
2.3. Orthogonal Experimental Design
2.4. Characterization
2.4.1. Direct Current (DC) Polarization
2.4.2. Alternating Current (AC) Impedance
2.4.3. Linear Sweep Voltammetry (LSV)
2.4.4. Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)
2.4.5. Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Interface Resistance
3.1.1. AC Impedance
3.1.2. Main Effect Analysis
3.1.3. Verification
3.2. Polymer Electrolyte Performance
3.2.1. DC Polarization
3.2.2. Electrochemical Window
3.3. Mechanism Analysis
3.3.1. Thermal Effect
3.3.2. Mechanical Effect
3.3.3. FTIR Analysis
4. Conclusions
- The proposed ultrasonic fusion method can significantly reduce the interface resistance between the polymer electrolyte and the cathode without adversely affecting the electronic insulation and electrochemical stability of the polymer electrolyte. The ultrasonic fusion method with the optimal processing parameters decreased the interface resistance by 96.2%.
- The order of the influence of the three processing parameters on the interface resistance was ultrasonic time > ultrasonic amplitude > ultrasonic pressure.
- The ultrasonic fusion method caused the temperature to rise at the interface. The thermal effect in the ultrasonic fusion process contributed to reducing the interface resistance. However, it was not the only reason why the ultrasonic fusion method reduced the interface resistance.
- The ultrasonic fusion method produced an impact at the interface, redistributing the molten electrolyte at the interface and improving the penetration capacity of the molten polymer electrolyte. In addition, the ultrasonic fusion method would not change the chemical composition of the electrolyte and the cathode at the interface.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Parameters | Value |
---|---|
R1 (Ω·cm2) | 1784.9 |
R2 (Ω·cm2) | 15,479.8 |
Wo-R (Ω·cm2) | 23,673 |
Wo-T (s) | 85.95 |
Wo-P (-) | 0.65467 |
CPE-T (Ω−1·cm−2·sp) | 0.00011033 |
CPE-P (-) | 0.49537 |
Sum of Squares (-) | 0.0062221 |
Parameters | Value |
---|---|
R1 (Ω·cm2) | 630.8 |
R2 (Ω·cm2) | 1057 |
Wo-R (Ω·cm2) | 4429 |
Wo-T (s) | 67.64 |
Wo-P (-) | 0.45553 |
CPE-T (Ω−1·cm−2·sp) | 0.00041719 |
CPE-P (-) | 0.58429 |
Sum of Squares (-) | 0.0014421 |
References
- Shaikh, F.K.; Zeadally, S. Energy harvesting in wireless sensor networks: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 55, 1041–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kandris, D.; Nakas, C.; Vomvas, D.; Koulouras, G. Applications of wireless sensor networks: An up-to-date survey. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2020, 3, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tuna, G.; Gungor, V. Energy harvesting and battery technologies for powering wireless sensor networks. In Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 25–38. [Google Scholar]
- Prauzek, M.; Konecny, J.; Borova, M.; Janosova, K.; Hlavica, J.; Musilek, P. Energy harvesting sources, storage devices and system topologies for environmental wireless sensor networks: A review. Sensors 2018, 18, 2446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Danilov, D.; Niessen, R.; Notten, P. Modeling all-solid-state Li-ion batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2010, 158, A215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Manthiram, A.; Yu, X.; Wang, S. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2017, 2, 16103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, W.; Gong, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Li, Y.; Yao, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Fu, K.; Pastel, G.; Lin, C.F.; Mo, Y. Reducing interfacial resistance between garnet-structured solid-state electrolyte and Li-metal anode by a germanium layer. Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1606042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wan, Z.; Lei, D.; Yang, W.; Liu, C.; Shi, K.; Hao, X.; Shen, L.; Lv, W.; Li, B.; Yang, Q.H. Low resistance–integrated all-solid-state battery achieved by Li7La3Zr2O12 nanowire upgrading polyethylene oxide (PEO) composite electrolyte and PEO cathode binder. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2019, 29, 1805301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Park, K.; Yu, B.-C.; Jung, J.-W.; Li, Y.; Zhou, W.; Gao, H.; Son, S.; Goodenough, J.B. Electrochemical nature of the cathode interface for a solid-state lithium-ion battery: Interface between LiCoO2 and garnet-Li7La3Zr2O12. Chem. Mater. 2016, 28, 8051–8059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, J.; Sun, C.; Wang, Z.; Liu, S.; An, B.; Sun, Z.; Li, F. Double ionic-electronic transfer interface layers for all solid-state lithium batteries. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2021, 60, 18448–18453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, Z.; Guo, X. Integrated interface between composite electrolyte and cathode with low resistance enables ultra-long cycle-lifetime in solid-state lithium-metal batteries. Sci. China Chem. 2021, 64, 673–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Yuan, H.; Zhou, C.; Wu, Y.; Tang, W.; Sang, S.; Liu, H. Facile interfacial adhesion enabled LATP-based solid-state lithium metal battery. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 392, 123650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gouin O’Shaughnessey, P.; Dubé, M.; Fernandez Villegas, I. Modeling and experimental investigation of induction welding of thermoplastic composites and comparison with other welding processes. J. Compos. Mater. 2016, 50, 2895–2910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ning, F.; Cong, W. Ultrasonic vibration-assisted (UV-A) manufacturing processes: State of the art and future perspectives. J. Manuf. Processes 2020, 51, 174–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villegas, I.F.; van Moorleghem, R. Ultrasonic welding of carbon/epoxy and carbon/PEEK composites through a PEI thermoplastic coupling layer. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2018, 109, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Wang, F.; Li, F.; Yang, X. Study on vibration transmission and interfacial fusion in ultrasonic bonding process for thermoplastic micro joint. Adv. Polym. Technol. 2018, 37, 1206–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Habibi, M.; Eslamian, M.; Soltani-Kordshuli, F.; Zabihi, F. Controlled wetting/dewetting through substrate vibration-assisted spray coating (SVASC). J. Coat. Technol. Res. 2016, 13, 211–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, W.; Ma, K.; Wang, Q.; Xue, H. The wetting of Pb droplet on the solid Al surface can be promoted by ultrasonic vibration–Molecular dynamics simulation. Mater. Lett. 2020, 264, 127118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Cui, X.; Zhang, C.; Gao, H.; Du, W.; Chen, Y. Promotion of Ionic Conductivity of PEO-Based Solid Electrolyte Using Ultrasonic Vibration. Polymers 2020, 12, 1889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, B.; Xia, H.; Fei, G.; Li, G.; Fan, W. High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound-Induced Thermal Effect for Solid Polymer Materials. Macromol. Chem. Phys. 2013, 214, 2519–2527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, K.; Shahab, S.; Mirzaeifar, R. Interaction of high-intensity focused ultrasound with polymers at the atomistic scale. Nanotechnology 2020, 32, 045707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Scheme | Ultrasonic Time (s) | Ultrasonic Amplitude (μm) | Ultrasonic Pressure (MPa) | Interface Resistance (Ω·cm2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 4 | 14 | 0.08 | 648. |
2 | 4 | 15 | 0.16 | 483. |
3 | 4 | 16 | 0.24 | 527. |
4 | 4 | 17 | 0.32 | 622. |
5 | 8 | 14 | 0.16 | 472. |
6 | 8 | 15 | 0.08 | 454. |
7 | 8 | 16 | 0.32 | 528. |
8 | 8 | 17 | 0.24 | 593. |
9 | 12 | 14 | 0.24 | 392. |
10 | 12 | 15 | 0.32 | 331. |
11 | 12 | 16 | 0.08 | 363. |
12 | 12 | 17 | 0.16 | 357. |
13 | 16 | 14 | 0.32 | 372. |
14 | 16 | 15 | 0.24 | 317. |
15 | 16 | 16 | 0.16 | 325. |
16 | 16 | 17 | 0.08 | 395. |
Electrolyte Resistance (Ω·cm2) | Interface Resistance (Ω·cm2) | |
---|---|---|
Reference Group | 1784.9 | 7739.9 |
Ultrasonic Group | 630.8 | 528.5 |
Level | Factor | ||
---|---|---|---|
Ultrasonic Time (s) | Ultrasonic Amplitude (μm) | Ultrasonic Pressure (MPa) | |
1 | 570.5 | 471.5 | 465.4 |
2 | 511.9 | 396.6 | 409.6 |
3 | 361.1 | 436.4 | 457.7 |
4 | 352.9 | 492.0 | 463.6 |
Delta | 217.6 | 95.4 | 55.8 |
Row rank | 1 | 2 | 3 |
30 °C | 50 °C | 70 °C | |
---|---|---|---|
Reference Group | 7739.9 | 502.1 | 63.2 |
Optimal Group | 293.6 | 33.25 | 20.0 |
30 °C | 50 °C | 70 °C | |
---|---|---|---|
Reference Group | 7739.9 | 502.1 | 63.2 |
Hot-pressed Group | 1316.7 | 143.6 | 27.9 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, H.; Ke, H.; Chen, Y.; Wang, J.; Yan, F.; Cui, X. Promotion of Interface Fusion of Solid Polymer Electrolyte and Cathode by Ultrasonic Vibration. Sensors 2022, 22, 1814. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22051814
Wang H, Ke H, Chen Y, Wang J, Yan F, Cui X. Promotion of Interface Fusion of Solid Polymer Electrolyte and Cathode by Ultrasonic Vibration. Sensors. 2022; 22(5):1814. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22051814
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Hui, Haoran Ke, Yizhe Chen, Jinhuo Wang, Fei Yan, and Xiaodong Cui. 2022. "Promotion of Interface Fusion of Solid Polymer Electrolyte and Cathode by Ultrasonic Vibration" Sensors 22, no. 5: 1814. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22051814