Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The performance of solid-state electrochemical systems is intimately tied to the potential and lithium distributions across electrolyte–electrode junctions that give rise to interface impedance. Here, we combine two operando methods, Kelvin probe force microscopy (KPFM) and neutron depth profiling (NDP), to identify the rate-limiting interface in operating Si-LiPON-LiCoO 2 solid-state batteries by mapping the contact potential difference (CPD) and the corresponding Li distributions. The contributions from ions, electrons, and interfaces are deconvolved by correlating the CPD profiles with Li-concentration profiles and by comparisons with first-principles-informed modeling. We find that the largest potential drop and variation in the Li concentration occur at the anode–electrolyte interface, with a smaller drop at the cathode–electrolyte interface and a shallow gradient within the bulk electrolyte. Correlating these results with electrochemical impedance spectroscopy following battery cycling at low and high rates confirms a long-standing conjecture linking large potential drops with a rate-limiting interfacial process.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fuller et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: