English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Two-dimensional (2D) materials show great potential for use in battery electrodes and are believed to be particularly promising for high-rate applications. However, there does not seem to be much hard evidence for the superior rate performance of 2D materials compared to non-2D materials. To examine this point, we have analyzed published rate-performance data for a wide range of 2D materials as well as non-2D materials for comparison. For each capacity-rate curve, we extract parameters that quantify performance which can then be analyzed using a simple mechanistic model. Contrary to expectations, by comparing a previously proposed figure of merit, we find 2D-based electrodes to be on average ∼40 times poorer in terms of rate performance than non-2D materials. This is not due to differences in solid-state diffusion times which were similarly distributed for 2D and non-2D materials. In fact, we found the main difference between 2D and non-2D materials is that ion mobility within the electrolyte-filled pores of the electrodes is significantly lower for 2D materials, a situation which we attribute to their high aspect ratios.

The Rate Performance of Two-Dimensional Material-Based Battery Electrodes May Not Be as Good as Commonly Believed