Jmca 2017
Jmca 2017
Materials Chemistry A
View Article Online
PAPER
Published on 27 February 2017. Downloaded by Thueringer Universitats Landesbibliothek Jena on 22/08/2017 15:26:21.
Electrochemical performance of
Na0.6[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 cathodes with high-
Cite this: J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5,
5858 working average voltage for Na-ion batteries
Ezequiel de la Llave,†a Prasant Kumar Nayak,†a Elena Levi,a Tirupathi Rao Penki,a
Shaul Bublil,a Pascal Hartmann,c Frederick-Francois Chesneau,c Miri Greenstein,a
Linda F. Nazarb and Doron Aurbach*a
Na0.6[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 is synthesized by a self-combustion reaction (SCR) and studied for the first time as
a cathode material for Na-ion batteries. The Na0.6[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 cathode presents remarkable high rate
capability and prolonged stability under galvanostatic cycling. A detailed analysis of X-ray diffraction (XRD)
patterns at various states of cycling reveals that the excellent structural stability is due to a primarily solid-
Received 9th December 2016
Accepted 26th February 2017
solution sodiation/desodiation mechanism of the material during cycling. Moreover, a meaningful
comparison with Na0.6MnO2 and Na0.6[Li0.2Mn0.8]O2 reveals that the Na0.6[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 cathode
DOI: 10.1039/c6ta10577g
achieves a very high working-average voltage that outperforms most of the lithium-doped manganese-
rsc.li/materials-a oxide cathodes published to date.
5858 | J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5, 5858–5864 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2017
View Article Online
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2017 J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5, 5858–5864 | 5859
View Article Online
Fig. 2 Electrochemical performance of Na0.6[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 cathodes. Panel (a): galvanostatic charge/discharge curves. Panel (b): dQ/dV vs.
V (voltage profile derivatives). The experiments were performed at 30 C at a rate of C/15 (12 mA g1) in 0.5 M NaPF6 PC electrolyte solution.
principal mechanism involved in the sodiation/desodiation transferred to the X-ray diffractometer in hermetically sealed
process is based on a solid-solution process instead of two- holders in order to avoid any reaction with the atmosphere prior
phase transitions. In recent work,25,26 we showed that, during to the XRD pattern acquisition. Fig. 3 also shows the XRD
cycling, the sodium manganese oxides undergo a detrimental patterns of both the pristine cathode and the cathode aer
multi-phase transition which induces structural instability. prolonged cycling.
Also, we proved that this structural instability can be overcome The XRD pattern on charge state conserve the main features
by lithium-structural doping, which has a direct effect on the of the pristine P2-phase, revealing that no phase transition take
insertion/deinsertion mechanism. In addition, we demon- place during charge. The determination of the unit cell
strated that the presence of lithium dopant effectively reduces parameters by prole matching, showed an increase in the
the extent of the detrimental Jahn–Teller distortions in the interlayered distance of about 1.9% in charged state, with
material, due to the increase in the average manganese oxida- respect to the pristine sample (11.042 Å vs. 11.253 Å). This is
tion state.26 Similar considerations are valid for the Na0.6[Li0.2- probably due to the enhancement of the repulsion between the
Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 cathode analyzed in this paper. MO2 sheets, which increases as de-sodiation takes place.
In order to further explore the sodiation/desodiation mech- At a fully-discharged state, the XRD pattern is virtually
anism, ex situ XRD measurements at charge (4.6 V) and identical to that of the pristine sample, conrming the full
discharge (2.0 V) states were examined (Fig. 3). Aer cycling, the reversibility of the charge/discharge process described above.
cells were opened inside a dry glovebox under a pure argon However, the XRD pattern evolution reveals that the small peak
atmosphere, thoroughly washed with dry PC solvent several located around 19 , which was identied as a secondary
times and le to dry inside the glovebox. The electrodes were Li2MnO3 phase, signicantly decreased in intensity during
cycling. This nding gives further conrmation to the activation
process proposed above. Fig. 3 also presents the XRD pattern
aer 100 galvanostatic cycles at a fully discharged state. In
comparison to the pristine cathode, the main features of the
XRD pattern aer the prolonged cycle are conserved, conrm-
ing the excellent structural stability of the cathode material.
Also, no evidence of the presence of the Li2MnO3 phase was
found. A slight shis and peak broadening are observed,
probably due to the accumulation of stacking faults aer pro-
longed sodiation/desodiation cycling, as previously reported for
similar materials.24
To provide a comprehensive picture of the structural stability
of our cathode material, the electrochemical behavior of the
cathodes, under prolonged galvanostatic cycles, is presented.
Fig. 4 shows both the discharge capacity and the coulombic
efficiency, of the Na0.6[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 cathode in conven-
tional coin-type half cells with 0.5 M NaPF6 PC solutions at
Fig. 3 Ex situ XRD patterns. Charge (4.6 V) and discharge (2.0 V) state 30 C. The cell was charged up to 4.6 V and then discharged to
during the second galvanostatic cycle were investigated. The pattern 2.0 V (vs. Na), and cycled at a rate of C/15.
of the pristine cathode (black curve) and the cathode after 100 gal- The rst cycle delivery possesses an initial discharge capacity
vanostatic cycles in discharge state (purple curve) are plotted for of 126 mA h g1, with a coulombic efficiency of 81%. This low
comparison. Black asterisks denote the signals related to the
coulombic efficiency is linked to the process occurring during the
aluminium current collector.
5860 | J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5, 5858–5864 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2017
View Article Online
Fig. 5 EIS of Na0.6Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6O2 cathodes in sodium half-cells. Nyquist plots at different potentials after 30 galvanostatic cycles (panel (a)),
and at different cycling steps in discharge (panel (b)) and charge (panel (c)) states. The experiments were performed at 30 C in 0.5 M NaPF6 PC
electrolyte solution.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2017 J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5, 5858–5864 | 5861
View Article Online
Fig. 6 Discharge capacity and average voltage (inset) of Na0.6Li0.2- Fig. 7 Voltage profile for Na0.6MnO2 (blue), Na0.6Li0.2Mn0.8O2 (red)
Ni0.2Mn0.6O2 cathodes in sodium half-cells at different current rates and Na0.6Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6O2 (black). The arrows indicate the average
(C/10 16 mA g1). The experiments were performed at 30 C in 0.5 M voltage in each case.
NaPF6 PC electrolyte solution.
5862 | J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5, 5858–5864 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2017
View Article Online
undergoes during galvanostatic cycling is predominately solid- 17 J.-J. Braconnier, C. Delmas and P. Hagenmuller, Mater. Res.
solution. The presence of the lithium dopant appears to be an Bull., 1982, 17, 993–1000.
effective method to partially suppress both the extent of the 18 S. Miyazaki, S. Kikkawa and M. Koizumi, Synth. Met., 1983, 6,
destructive cooperative Jahn–Teller distortions and detrimental 211–271.
phase transitions. Moreover, the Na0.6[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 19 A. Maazaz, C. Delmas and P. Hagenmuller, J. Inclusion
Published on 27 February 2017. Downloaded by Thueringer Universitats Landesbibliothek Jena on 22/08/2017 15:26:21.
cathode presents an exceptionally high working average voltage, Phenom., 1983, 1, 45–51.
outperforming most of the lithium-doped manganese-oxide 20 R. Kataoka, T. Mukai, A. Yoshizawa and T. Sakai, J.
cathodes published to date. This work serves as a proof of Electrochem. Soc., 2013, 160, A933–A939.
concept that the careful selection of the proper dopants 21 N. Yabuuchi, R. Hara, M. Kajiyama, K. Kubota, T. Ishigaki,
improves the properties of the manganese oxide intercalation A. Hoshikawa and S. Komaba, Adv. Energy Mater., 2014, 4,
materials, opening the door to the development of cost-effective 1301453.
practical sodium-ion batteries. 22 N. V. Nghia, P.-W. Ou and I.-M. Hung, Electrochim. Acta,
2015, 161, 63–71.
23 J. Xu, D. H. Lee, R. J. Clément, X. Yu, M. Leskes, A. J. Pell,
Acknowledgements G. Pintacuda, X.-Q. Yang, C. P. Grey and Y.-S. Meng, Chem.
Mater., 2014, 26, 1260–1269.
L. F. N. and D. A. gratefully acknowledge funding from BASF SE
24 R. J. Clement, P. G. Bruce and C. P. Grey, J. Electrochem. Soc.,
for ongoing support through the BASF Research Network in
2015, 162, A2589–A2604.
Electrochemistry and Batteries. Partial support for this work
25 E. de la Llave, V. Borgel, K. J. Park, J. Y. Hwang, Y.-K. Sun,
was obtained from the Israel Science Foundation (ISF) as part of
P. Hartmann, F. F. Chesneau and D. Aurbach, ACS Appl.
the INREP project, and from the Israel Ministry of Science and
Mater. Interfaces, 2016, 8, 1867–1875.
Technology as part of the Israel–India cooperation program.
26 E. de la Llave, E. Talaie, E. Levi, P. K. Nayak, M. Dixit,
P. T. Rao, P. Hartmann, F. F. Chesneau, D. T. Major,
References M. Greenstein, D. Aurbach and L. F. Nazar, Chem. Mater.,
2016, 28, 9064–9076.
1 B. Kennedy, D. Patterson and S. Camilleri, J. Power Sources, 27 I. Hasa, D. Buchholz, S. Passerini and J. Hassoun, ACS Appl.
2000, 90, 156–162. Mater. Interfaces, 2015, 7, 5206–5212.
2 M. Armand and J.-M. Tarascon, Nature, 2008, 451, 652–657. 28 D. Kim, S.-H. Kang, M. Slater, S. Rood, J. T. Vaughey,
3 T. Kojima, T. Ishizu, T. Horiba and M. Yoshikawa, J. Power N. Karan, M. Balasubramanian and C. S. Johnson, Adv.
Sources, 2009, 189, 859–863. Energy Mater., 2011, 1, 333–336.
4 V. Etacheri, R. Marom, R. Elazari, G. Salitra and D. Aurbach, 29 N. K. Karan, M. Slater, F. Dogan, D. Kim, C. S. Johnson and
Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 3243–3262. M. Balasubramanian, J. Electrochem. Soc., 2014, 6, A1107–
5 S. W. Kim, D. H. Seo, X. M. Ma and G. Ceder, Adv. Energy A1115.
Mater., 2012, 2, 710–721. 30 E. Lee, J. Lu, Y. Ren, X. Luo, X. Zhang, J. Wen, D. Miller,
6 H. Pan, Y.-S. Hu and L. Chen, Energy Environ. Sci., 2013, 6, A. DeWahl, S. Hackney, B. Key, D. Kim, M. D. Slater and
2338–2360. C. S. Johnson, Adv. Energy Mater., 2014, 4, 1400458.
7 M. D. Slater, D. Kim, E. Lee and C. S. Johnson, Adv. Funct. 31 N. V. Nghia, P.-W. Ou and I.-M. Hung, Ceram. Int., 2015, 41,
Mater., 2013, 23, 947–958. 10199–10207.
8 N. Yabuuchi, K. Kubota, M. Dahbi and S. Komaba, Chem. 32 H. Liu, J. Xu, C. Ma and Y. S. Meng, Chem. Commun., 2015,
Rev., 2014, 114, 11636–11682. 51, 4693–4696.
9 D. Kundu, E. Talaie, V. Duffort and L. F. Nazar, Angew. Chem., 33 P. K. Nayak, J. Grinblat, M. Levi, B. Markovsky and
Int. Ed., 2015, 54, 3431–3448. D. Aurbach, J. Electrochem. Soc., 2014, 161, A1534–A1547.
10 J. M. Paulsen and J. R. Dahn, Solid State Ionics, 1999, 126, 3– 34 A. R. Armstrong, M. Holzapfel, P. Novak, C. S. Johnson,
24. S. H. Kang, M. M. Thackeray and P. G. Bruce, J. Am. Chem.
11 V. Palomares, P. Serras, I. Villaluenga, K. B. Hueso, Soc., 2006, 128, 8694–8698.
J. Carretero-Gonzalez and T. Rojo, Energy Environ. Sci., 35 D. Y. W. Yu, K. Yanagida, Y. Kato and H. Nakamura, J.
2012, 5, 5884–5901. Electrochem. Soc., 2009, 156, A417–A424.
12 V. Palomares, M. Casas-Cabanas, E. Castillo-Martı́nez, 36 N. Yabuuchi, K. Yamamoto, K. Yoshii, I. Nakai, T. Nishizawa,
M. Han and T. Rojo, Energy Environ. Sci., 2013, 6, 2312–2337. A. Omaru, T. Toyooka and S. Komaba, J. Electrochem. Soc.,
13 Z. Jian, H. Yu and H. Zhou, Electrochem. Commun., 2013, 34, 2013, 160, A39–A45.
215–218. 37 M. Gu, I. Belharouak, J. Zheng, H. Wu, J. Xiao, A. Genc,
14 K. Kubota, N. Yabuuchi, H. Yoshida, M. Dahbi and K. Amine, S. Thevuthasan, D. R. Baer, J.-G. Zhang,
S. Komaba, MRS Bull., 2014, 39, 416–422. N. D. Browning, J. Liu and C. Wang, ACS Nano, 2013, 7,
15 M. H. Han, E. Gonzalo, G. Singha and T. Rojo, Energy 760–767.
Environ. Sci., 2015, 8, 81–102. 38 F. Amalraj, M. Talianker, B. Markovsky, D. Sharon,
16 C. Delmas, J.-J. Braconnier, C. Fouassier and L. Burlaka, G. Shar, E. Zinigrad, O. Haik, D. Aurbach,
P. Hagenmuller, Solid State Ionics, 1981, 3, 165–169.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2017 J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5, 5858–5864 | 5863
View Article Online
J. Lampert, M. Schulz-Dobrick and A. Garsuch, J. 42 P. K. Nayak, J. Grinblat, M. Levi, O. Haik, E. Levi, Y.-K. Sun,
Electrochem. Soc., 2013, 160, A324–A337. N. Munichandraiah and D. Aurbach, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2015,
39 P. K. Nayak, J. Grinblat, M. Levi and D. Aurbach, Electrochim. 3, 14598–14608.
Acta, 2014, 137, 546–556. 43 P. K. Nayak, J. Grinblat, M. Levi, B. Markovsky and
40 X. Yu, Y. Lyu, L. Gu, H. Wu, S.-M. Bak, Y. Zhou, K. Amine, D. Aurbach, J. Power Sources, 2016, 318, 9–17.
Published on 27 February 2017. Downloaded by Thueringer Universitats Landesbibliothek Jena on 22/08/2017 15:26:21.
S. N. Ehrlich, H. Li, K.-W. Nam and X.-Q. Yang, Adv. Energy 44 J. C. Knight and A. Manthiram, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2015, 3,
Mater., 2014, 4, 1300950. 22199–22207.
41 P. K. Nayak, J. Grinblat, M. Levi, O. Haik, E. Levi and 45 M. D. Levi, V. Dargel, Y. Shilina, I. Halalay and D. Aurbach,
D. Aurbach, J. Solid State Electrochem., 2015, 19, 2781–2792. Electrochim. Acta, 2014, 149, 126–135.
5864 | J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5, 5858–5864 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2017