Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This work evolves a universal strategy, toward simultaneously addressing the air/water‐instability and structural‐cum‐electrochemical instability of “layered” Na–transition‐metal (T M )–oxide‐based cathode materials for Na‐ion batteries, by way of varying the “interslab” spacing via tuning the T M O bond covalency. In this regard, model O3‐structured NaT M oxides, with varied “charge‐to‐size” ratio of the cation‐combination (viz., T M ‐ + non‐T M ‐ions) in the T M ‐layer [i.e., ( C : S )T M ], are designed and subjected to structural characterizations, density‐functional‐theory‐based studies, air/water‐exposure studies, electrochemical cycling, and operando investigations. Such studies have yielded a clear correlation‐cum‐trend concerning lower ( C : S )T M => lower T M O covalency => higher effective negative charge on O‐ion (which gets shared by both T M ‐ and Na‐ions) => stronger‐cum‐shorter NaO bond => reduced “interslab” spacing => lower Na‐transport kinetics => suppressed spontaneous Na‐extraction upon air/water‐exposure => concomitant vastly improved air/water‐stability => suppressed/delayed O3 → P3 transformation during electrochemical Na‐extraction (i.e., charging) => concomitant vastly improved electrochemical cyclic stability. Furthermore, a critical d (ONaO) / d (OTMO) of ≈1.38 for the O3 structure, corresponding to the initiation of O3 → P3 transformation during desodiation/charging is revealed. NaT M O 2 s having higher initial ( C : S )T M s reach this critical d (ONaO) / d (OTMO) earlier (i.e., upon minimized Na‐removal) and, thus, suffer from more transformations during continued desodiation/charge, resulting in structural‐cum‐electrochemical instability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kumar et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: