Electrochemical Performance as the Positive Electrode of Polyaniline and Polypyrrole Hollow Sphere with Different Shell Thickness

껍질 두께가 다른 폴리아닐린과 폴리피롤 속 빈 구형체 양전극의 전기화학적 성능

  • Published : 2012.04.10


Polyaniline (PANI) and polypyrrole (Ppy) hollow sphere structures with controlled shell thicknesses can be easily synthesized than those of using a layer-by-layer method for cathode active material of lithium-ion batteries. Polystyrene (PS) core was synthesized by emulsion polymerization using an anion surfactant. The shell thicknesses of PANI and Ppy were controlled by amounts of aniline and pyrrole monomers. PS was removed by an organic solution. This structure increased in contact with an electrolyte and a specific capacity in lithium-ion batteries. But polymers have disadvantages such as the difficult control of molecular weights and low densities. These disadvantages were completed by controlled shell thicknesses. The amount of aniline monomer increased from 1.2, 2.4, 3.6, 4.8 to 6.0 mL, and the shell thicknesses were 30.2, 38.0, 42.2, 48.2, and 52.4 nm, respectively. And the amount of pyrrole monomer was 0.6, 1.2, 2.4 and 3.6 mL, the shell thicknesses were 16.0, 22.0, 27.0 and 34.0 nm, respectively. In the cathode materials with controlled shell thicknesses, shell thicknesses of the PANI hollow spheres were 30.2, 42.2, and 52.4 nm, and discharge specific capacities of after 10 cycle were ~18, ~29, and ~62 mAh/g, respectively. The shell thicknesses of the Ppy hollow spheres were 16.0, 22.0, 27.0 and 34.0 nm, and discharge specific capacities of after 15 cycle were ~15, ~36, ~56, and ~77 mAh/g, respectively. Thus, shell thicknesses of PANI and Ppy increased, the specific capacities increased.


  1. P. J. Nigrey, D. Fr. MacInnes, D. P. Nairns, and A. J. MacDiarmid, J. Electrochem. Soc., 128 1651 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1149/1.2127704
  2. J. Chen, A. K. Burrell, G. E. Collis, D. L. Officer, G. F. Swiegers, C. O. Too, and G. G. Wallace, Electrochim.Acta., 47, 2715 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4686(02)00136-6
  3. J. Chen, C. O. Too, G. G. Wallace, G. F. Swiegers, B. W. Skelton, and A. H. White, Electrochim.Acta., 47, 4227 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4686(02)00446-2
  4. J. Chen, J. Huang, G. F. Swiegers, C. O. Too, and G. G. Wallace, Chem. Commun., 3, 308 (2004).
  5. A. G. MacDiarmid, J. C. Chiang, M. Halpern, W. S. Huang, S. L. Mu, N. L. D. Somasiri, W. Wu, and S. I. Yaniger, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst., 121, 173 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1080/00268948508074857
  6. A. Angeli and L. Alessandri, Gazz. Chim, Ital., 46, 283 (1916).
  7. S. Rapi, V. Bochi, and G. P. Gardini, Synth. Met., 32, 351 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/0379-6779(89)90777-7
  8. A. Dall' 'olio, Y. Dascola, and V. Varaca, Compfes Rendus, 267, 433 (1968).
  9. A. F. Diaz, K. K. Kanazawa, and G. P. Gardini, J. Chem. Soc., 635 (1979).
  10. A. J. Nelson, S. Glenis, and A. J. Frank, J. Vac. Sci. Technol., 6, 954 (1987).
  11. D. M. Collard and M. S. Stoakes, Chem. Mater., 6, 850 (1985).
  12. F. Caruso, R. A. Caruso, and H. M wald, Science, 282, 1111 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.282.5391.1111
  13. X. W. Lou, L. A. Archer, and Z. Yang, Adv. Mater., 20, 3987 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.200800854