Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Carbon
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/carbon

A graphene oxide coated sulfide-based solid electrolyte for dendrite-

free lithium metal batteries
Jianwei Li a, Yuanyuan Li a, Jun Cheng b, Qing Sun a, Linna Dai a, Xiangkun Nie a,
Lina Chen b, Guifang Han a, **, Lijie Ci a, b, *
a
Key Laboratory for Liquid-Solid Structural Evolution & Processing of Materials (Ministry of Education), Research Center for Carbon Nanomaterials, School
of Materials Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, 250061, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Advanced Welding and Joining, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology (Shenzhen), Shenzhen,
518055, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sulfide-based solid electrolyte is one of the most promising solid electrolytes due to its high ionic
Received 29 December 2020 conductivity and wide electrochemical window. However, it suffers from serious interfacial issues with
Received in revised form lithium metal, which hinder the lithium-ion transport during cycling process and increase the interfacial
22 January 2021
resistance and instability. Protection only from Li anode side is not enough since Li enters into the bulk
Accepted 23 January 2021
solid electrolyte resulting reaction and dendrite growth. Herein, we design a graphene oxide (GO) coated
Available online 22 February 2021
solid electrolyte Li7P3S11 particles for stable and efficient all-solid-state battery application. The GO could
partially isolate the Li7P3S11 solid electrolyte from lithium metal. Meanwhile, the GO or rGO reduced by Li
Keywords:
Sulfide-based solid electrolyte
guide the homogeneous growth of Li and increase the cycling stability. Our work provides a facile
Graphene oxide method to fully protect Li7P3S11 in three directions from reaction with Li metal for dendrite-free and
Cycling performance highly stable sulfide-based all-solid-state battery applications. This work might inspire the community
Dendrite-free with new material engineering/design strategies toward practical application in highly stable all solid
state lithium-ion batteries.
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Secondary batteries with improved safety and higher energy
density are in urgent demand in large scale energy storage devices
and electric vehicles applications [1,2]. However, conventional
batteries employ flammable organic liquid electrolytes suffering
from severe safety issues such as fire and explosion [3,4]. Recently,
all-solid-state batteries (ASSBs) adopting solid-state electrolytes,
have been considered as ideal next-generation rechargeable bat-
teries to fundamentally solve the safety concern and enhance the
energy density [5e8]. It has been extensively acknowledged that
the electrolyte should meet the following advantages: high ionic
conductivity (>1 mS cm
1), wide electrochemical window (>5 V)
* Corresponding author. Key Laboratory for Liquid-Solid Structural Evolution &
Processing of Materials (Ministry of Education), Research Center for Carbon
Nanomaterials, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shandong University,
Jinan, 250061, China.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: gfhan@sdu.edu.cn (G. Han), lci@sdu.edu.cn (L. Ci).
and superior chemical stability against anode and cathodes. How-
ever, most of oxide-based solid-state electrolytes are still con-
fronted with low ionic conductivity and high processing cost
[9e11]. The sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte has higher
ionic conductivities (10
3-10
2 S cm
1) due to the high polariz-
ability of sulfide ions, and meanwhile, a wide electrochemically
stable voltage window [12e20]. Benefiting from its high ionic
conductivity, low cost, decent deformability, as well as a facile so-
lution synthesizability, the glassy LiePeS sulfide, Li7P3S11 (denoted
as LPS) solid electrolyte has received mass attention [21e25].
However, some challenges still need to be overcome for reliable
ASSBs using the LPS solid electrolyte, mainly including: (1) the LPS
electrolyte could react with the lithium metal, which increases
interface resistance and results in low Coulomb efficiency [25e27].
(2) lithium dendrites could grow along pores, cracks, grain
boundaries and other defects inside LPS and finally penetrate the
whole electrolyte [28e30]. However, the mechanism for this
growth and formation of lithium dendrite in solid electrolyte still
remains unclear; (3) Even more, direct growth of lithium dendrites
inside the solid electrolyte was observed [30]. The high electrons

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2021.01.159
0008-6223/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Li, Y. Li, J. Cheng et al.
conductivity of SSEs might contribute to the formation of Li den-
drites, albeit further studies are necessary [31].
To address these issues mentioned above, special attention has
been paid to suppress interface reaction and Li dendrite growth
[32,33]. Yang et al. reported that metal-phosphide-doping
restrained the interface reaction between Li and LPS [34]. Howev-
er, the preparation process was very complex and not easy to
control [35,36]. Graphene or reduced graphene oxide (rGO) were
mixed with or coated on Li anode and the layer feature could guide
the uniform growth of planar lithium layers instead of random
dendrites [37e39]. These films can also hinder the side reaction
between the lithium metal and electrolyte. However, most of these
reports are based on batteries with liquid electrolyte, and the
protection layer between Li anode and electrolyte could effectively
suppress the interface reaction. In ASSBs adopting solid-state
electrolytes, Li metal enters into bulk solid electrolyte during
cycling and introduces large amount of Li/electrolyte interface
resulting in sever side reaction. Considering the large area of in-
terfaces between Li metal and bulk solid electrolyte, protection
only from Li anode side is not enough. A strategy to fully protect
solid electrolyte from reaction with Li and meanwhile inhibit the
growth of Li dendrite should be developed.
Here in this work, a facile method was proposed to form a GO
coating on top of LPS particle surface then pressed into pellet for
battery assembly. Due to this GO protection layer, the interfacial
reaction between the LPS electrolyte and lithium metal is miti-
gated. Meanwhile, GO layer could guide or induce the homoge-
neous growth of Li during striping/plating process. Besides, even if
the GO is reduced by Li, it would not mitigate these effects as rGO is
also a good protection material reported. The LieLi symmetrical cell
assembled with GO coated LPS electrolyte was stably charged/dis-
charged for 300 cycles at the room temperature with a current of
0.1 mA cm
2. The whole cell demonstrated excellent cycling per-
formance with a reversible capacity over 260 mAh g
1 and cycling
steadily over 50 cycles.
2. Experimental
2.1. Materials synthesis
Graphene oxide (GO) was synthesized by a modified Hummers’
method as we previously reported [40]. Briefly, Li2S and P2S5 with a
mole ratio of 7:3 were mixed with GO with different mass ratio (0%,
0.5%, 1% and 2%). Then, the mixture was ground thoroughly to get a
homogeneous blend. Subsequently, the powder was placed in
20 ml acetonitrile solvent under stirring at 50  C for 72 h. After that,
the solvent was dried at 80  C for overnight. Then the powder was
further heated at a temperature of 250  C for 1 h and the hybrid
electrolytes were obtained (marked as x% GO@LPS, and x% is the
percentage of GO). All preparation processes were performed in a
nitrogen filled glove box.
2.2. Material characterization
Morphologies of coated LPS powder and Li foil after cycling were
characterized by a scanning electron microscope (SEM, JSM-7800F,
Hitachi) and a transmission electron microscope (JEOL JEM-2100 F).
The crystalline structure of samples was investigated by X-ray
diffraction using a Miniflex 600 instrument with copper Ka radia-
tion and scanning range between 10 and 80 . Raman spectra were
conducted on a Renishaw in Via micro-Raman microscope. The X-
ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, ESCALAB 250) analysis was
performed with Al Ka as the X-ray source.
53
Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59
2.3. Electrochemical measurement
Ionic conductivities of Li7P3S11 and x% GO@Li7P3S11 electrolytes
were measured using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy
(EIS) by a blocking symmetric In/Li7P3S11/In cell. The as-synthesized
powder was cold-pressed under 300 MPa into a pellet with a
diameter of 10 mm and thickness around 1 mm. Cyclic voltam-
metry (CV) was carried out at a scan rate of 0.1 mV s
1 within a
potential range of
0.2e5.0 V. EIS was performed from 100 kHz to
0.01 Hz. The CV and EIS were carried out using an Autolab analyzer
(PGSTAT302 N). For all-solid-state batteries assembly, around
8e10 mg composite cathode (graphite) were spread and pressed on
the one side of the pelletized SE under 300 MPa, after which
lithium foil was successively attached on the opposite side of SE
pellet under 150 MPa. The galvanostatic discharge/charge cycles
were obtained using a battery testing system (Land battery testing
instrument) in the voltage range of 0.1e3 V at the room tempera-
ture. LiNbO3-coated LiCoO2 was used as cathode material. The
composite of LiNbO3-coated LiCoO2 and LPS with a weight ratio of
7:3 were uniformly mixed as the working electrode. Metallic Li was
selected as anode. The assembled ASSLBs were charged and dis-
charged in galvanostatic mode at 0.1 C (1 C ¼ 140 mAh g
1) in the
range of 2.8e4.2 V vs Li/Liþ. All processes were carried out in a
glove box.
3. Results and discussion
The schematic synthesis procedure is shown in Fig. 1(a). GO was
dissolved in ACN to form a solution. Subsequently, Li2S and P2S5
with a stoichiometric ratio of 7:3 were added and further kept
stirring at 50  C for 48 h. After evaporation of ACN solution under
80  C, the obtained dry powder was heated at 250  C for 1 h. Then
the GO-coated LPS composite electrolyte powder was obtained. It
should be noted that the thickness of the GO layer affects the ionic
conductivity of composite powders. Therefore, three different ra-
tios between GO and LPS, i.e. 0.5%, 1% and 2%, were chosen during
synthesis. As can be seen from Fig. 1(b), the control LPS powder is
uniform nanoparticles with size of around 100 nm. When GO is
introduced, aggregation of particles are observed with GO wrapped
outside (Fig. 1(cee)). The thickness of GO increased with the
increasing of GO content. Most interestingly, the sheet-like struc-
ture can be clearly observed for the 1% GO@LPS powder, where GO
coated on nanoparticles as depicted in Fig. 1(d). This feature dis-
appears when further increasing the ratio of GO (Fig. 1(e)). These
results confirm that GO is successfully coated/wrapped onto LPS
particles. High-resolution TEM image (Fig. S1) further demonstrate
the ultra-thin GO layers on the top of LPS particle.
To investigate the effect of GO coating on the phase structure of
LPS powders, XRD was conducted and given in Fig. 2(a) and S2.
Main diffraction peaks at 2q ¼ 15.9 , 29.8 , 30.0 , 31.2 , 31.9 and
34.3 can be indexed to Li7P3S11. No significant difference is noticed
after GO coating, which suggests that addition of GO during syn-
thesis does not change the crystal structure of LPS. No peak from GO
(XRD pattern for pure GO is shown in Fig. S3) is found probably due
to its very low amount. Raman was performed to reveal the
chemical structure. As exhibited in Fig. 2(b), an obvious peak
around 426 cm
1 corresponding to PS3
4 unit is observed for the
pristine LPS and GO coated ones, consistent with the XRD results.
The electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) of pressed
electrolyte pallets are shown in Fig. 2(c). The ionic conductivity (s)
of these GO@Li7P3S11 composite solid electrolytes is calculated ac-
cording to:
s ¼ L/RS (1)
J. Li, Y. Li, J. Cheng et al. Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic illustration of the synthesis strategy of GO@LPS composite electrolyte; SEM images of (b) LPS, (c) 0.5% GO@LPS, (d) 1% GO@LPS and (e) 2% GO@LPS solid
electrolytes. (A colour version of this figure can be viewed online.)

Fig. 2. (a) XRD patterns, (b) Raman spectra, (c) Nyquist plots and (d) Time dependence of DC current of LPS and x% GO@LPS composite electrolytes. (A colour version of this figure
can be viewed online.)

where L and S are the thickness and area of the electrolyte pellet,
respectively, and R is the resistance obtained from the EIS mea-
surement [23].
The calculated ionic conductivities are ~1.01  10
3 S cm
1 for
LPS, ~1.02  10
3, 1.11  10
3 and 0.45  10
3 S cm
1 for 0.5%, 1%
and 2% GO added LPS, respectively, in which 1% GO@LPS exhibits
the highest ionic conductivity. Addition of appropriate amount of
GO slightly enhances the ionic conductivity of LPS. Because various
oxygen functional groups that GO contains can interact with
lithium thiophosphate, it can increase ionic conductivity [41e44].
Moreover, it has been reported that the lithium ions can potentially
find low-energy conducting paths along the interface between the
carbon-based filler and solid state electrolyte [45]. The GO sheet
has a number of oxygenated functionalities including epoxy, hy-
droxyl, and carboxyl groups, which are beneficial to Liþ transport.
As the GO content increases (1%), the GO sheets can interconnect to
form a network, which can facilitate continuous ion conducting
within the composite electrolyte. Table S1 provides a detailed
summarization of the ionic conductivity for the Li7P3S11 using the
solution method.

54
J. Li, Y. Li, J. Cheng et al.
Electronic conductivities were also measured by the DC method
use blocking electrodes. Fig. 2(d) shows the time dependent DC
current under a voltage of 1 V. When the blocking electrodes are
adopted, the polarization initially occurs and then the current
become nearly constant. The calculated electronic conductivity of
the 1% GO@LPS from the constant part is 6.2  10
8 S cm
1. The
ionic conductivity of the electrolyte is about 5 orders of magnitude
higher than its electronic conductivity, which suggests that the
electronic conductivity could be ignored.
To investigate whether this strategy could enhance the perfor-
mance of the electrolyte, Li/x% GO@LPS/Li symmetric batteries
were assembled and tested at a current density of 0.1 mA/cm2 at
room temperature. As shown in Fig. 3(a), the control cell from LPS
exhibits an unstable overpotential of 70 mV, which is quickly
shorted after 40 h cycles at 0.1 mA cm
2. However, for the cell with
1% GO@LPS electrolyte, a lower overpotential of 45 mV is observed
Fig. 3. (a) Li plating/stripping voltage profiles of Li/Li symmetric batteries with LPS and 1% GO@LPS electrolyte at a current density of 0.1 mA cm
2; (b) and (c) Magnified region in
(a); (d) Typical voltage profiles at 0.1 mA cm
2. (e) Cyclic voltammogram of the Li/SE/In cell at a scan rate of 1 mV s
1. (A colour version of this figure can be viewed online.)
55
Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59
and the cell can be stable up to 600 h of Li plating/stripping without
any significant change (Fig. 3(a)). Magnified details of Fig. 3(a) are
illustrated in Fig. 3(b) and (c) at the stage of 20e30 h and 90e100 h
plating/stripping times, respectively. These figures clearly present
that the overpotential of the cells from 1% GO@LPS is much lower
than that from LPS. Similar short circuit phenomena are found for
the cells from LPS with addition of 0.5% and 2% GO but appear at
different times (Fig. S3). Meanwhile, the LPS and 1% GO@LPS was
systematically tested at a current density of 0.1 mA cm
2 with a
capacity of 1 mAh cm
2 (Fig. 3(d)). Li/1% GO@LPS/Li symmetric cell
exhibits the most stable performance compared to others. The
critical current density (CCD) is usually adopted to evaluate the
dendrite suppression capability of the electrolyte. Fig. S3c shows
the voltageetime curves for the LPS and x% GO@LPS electrolytes.
The critical current densities for the samples with different amount
of GO are shown in Fig. S3c. The CCD of pristine LPS is 0.2 mA cm
2.
J. Li, Y. Li, J. Cheng et al.
With the GO coating, the value increases continuously and reaches
the maximum value of 0.6 mA cm
2 at 1% GO coating. Therefore the
1% GO coating LPS not only increases the ionic conductivity, but also
effectively enhances the interfacial stability between electrolyte
and Li metal, and inhibits the growth of lithium dendrites. In order
to figure out whether the addition of GO will affect the electro-
chemical window of LPS, cyclic voltammetry measurement was
conducted with Li and stainless steel (SS) served as the reference
and the working electrodes, respectively. The scan rate is 1 mV s
1,
and the voltage range is from
0.5 to 5 V vs. Li/Liþ. As profiled in
Fig. 3(e), the lithium deposition (Li/Liþ) can only be observed at
about 0 V and no other peak is observed. It suggests that all samples
exhibit a similar electrochemical window up to 5 V and good sta-
bility with lithium. The addition of GO does not affect the voltage
window of LPS. Therefore, the enhanced performance of 1%
GO@LPS electrolyte should be attributed to the GO coating inhib-
iting the interfacial side reaction between LPS and lithium anode.
To further reveal the evolution of the interface between Li metal
and SE during the cycling process, the surface of Li metal surface
before and after the charge-discharge cycles were checked by SEM.
The original surface of Li metal is very smooth (Fig. 4 (a)). With the
increasing number of cycles, the morphology of Li anode contacting
with LPS become looser and rougher (Fig. 4(b)), probably due to the
reaction between the electrolyte and Li metal. However, the surface
of Li contacted with 1% GO@LPS hybrid SE still remains smooth
after cycling for 100 h (Fig. 4(c)), indicating the good protection of
GO against the interfacial reaction between LPS and Li metal.
Meanwhile, the conductivity changes of the symmetric cells after
cycles were also measured as shown in Fig. 4(d) and S4. The
resistance of the pristine cell changes significantly after 10 h’s cycle,
indicating the unstable interface between LPS and Li metal. In
Fig. 4. SEM images of (a) as-received Li foil, Li foil assembled with (b) LPS electrolyte after cycling for 20 h and (c) 1% GO@LPS after cycling for 100 h; (d) The resistance of Li/SE/Li
symmetric cell fabricated form LPS and after cycling electrolyte after different cycles at room temperature. (A colour version of this figure can be viewed online.)
56
Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59
contrast, a small change in the total resistance is measurable for cell
from 1% GO@LPS after 20 h’s (102 U) or even 100 h’s cycle (150 U)
from original sample. It further suggests that x% GO@LPS could
increase the interface compatibility in the symmetric batteries,
thus enhance its electrochemical performance.
As proposed afore and schematically shown in Fig. 5(a), GO
coated on the surface of LPS particle provides a protection function.
When contacted with Li, GO might be reduced to reduced graphene
oxide (rGO) and Li be oxidized to LieO even if the Li dendrite breaks
the coated rGO layer. The rGO layer ensures the stability at the
lithium/electrolyte interface and inhibits the growth of lithium
dendrite, simultaneously. This is confirmed by a clear LieO peak
observed in the XPS result from the LPS electrolyte surface after
cycling, as shown in Fig. S6. Therefore, the advantage of the GO
coating on the electrolyte is to prevent the Li dendrite growth
during the micro-short circuit in the ASSLIBs. To directly get evi-
dence whether GO/rGO could effectively protect LPS from reaction
with Li metal, XPS analysis was conducted from the Li surface after
cycling with LPS and 1% GO@LPS electrolytes for 20 cycles [Fig. 5(b-
f)]. For LPS after cycling, P 2p can be fitted into three different
species at 126.05, 132.40 and 134.30 eV, which belong to Li3P, P2S4
7
and PS3
4 , respectively (Fig. 5(b)). The appearance of Li3P indicates
that Li metal reacts with the LPS electrolyte. Similarly, S 2p peak can
be fitted by four different sulfur species shown in Fig. 5(c). The peak
at 160.8 eV is assigned to Li2S according to reference. [25] The
detectable Li2S as well as Li3P confirm that the reaction occurs
between Li metal and the LPS electrolyte. The reaction mechanism
might follow the equation below:
Li7P3S11 þ 24 Li / 11 Li2S þ Li3P (2)
J. Li, Y. Li, J. Cheng et al. Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59

Fig. 5. (a) Schematic diagrams of GO coating to inhibit interfacial reaction between Li and bulk electrolyte. XPS spectra of (b) P 2p and (c) S 2p for LPS, and (d) C 1s, (e) P 2p and (f) S
2p for 1% GO@LPS electrolyte surface after cycling. (A colour version of this figure can be viewed online.)

Fig. 6. (a) Charge-discharge profiles of whole cell assemble from (a) LPS and (b) 1% GO@LPS at 0.05 A g
1; (c) CV curves of 1% GO@LPS/graphite batteries at 0.1 mV s
1; and (d)
Comparison of the cycling stability of LPS and 1% GO@LPS at 0.05 A g
1. (A colour version of this figure can be viewed online.)

When the LPS electrolyte is coated by GO, the C 1s XPS signal
(Fig. 5(d)) shows three peaks at 284.0, 284.5 and 289.1 eV, assigned
to CeO, C]C/CeC and OeC]O bands, respectively. rGO is gener-
ated due to the reaction between Li and GO@LPS as mentioned
afore. However, the P 2p peak (Fig. 5(e)) is fitted into two
components centered at 132.4 (P2S4
3

7 ) and 134.2 eV (PS4 ). The S 2p
(Fig. 5(f)) peak is fitted into peaks with binding energies of 161.2
(PeSeLi) and 161.9 eV (P]S/PeSeP). No peaks for Li2S and Li3P are
detected for GO coated LPS, indicating the good protection effect of
GO against the interfacial reaction between Li and LPS.

57
J. Li, Y. Li, J. Cheng et al.
Fig. 7. (a) The cycling performance of the cell LiCoO2/SEs/Li at 0.1 C; (b) Charge-discharge curves of LiCoO2/SEs/Li cells. (A colour version of this figure can be viewed online.)
Finally, all solid-state graphite/Li battery with SE was assembled
and the charge-discharge curves at different rates were tested at
the room temperature. As exhibited in Fig. 6(a), only one voltage
plateau at less than 0.5 V is observed in the first discharge curve of
the Li/LPS/graphite battery and it shows an abnormal discharge
capacity (>1700 mAh g
1) due to the side reaction and quickly
broken down after 20 cycles. The charge/discharge profiles of Li/1%
GO@LPS/graphite cell are shown in Fig. 6(b). The curves overlap
well from 10th to 40th cycle, indicating a superior cycling stability
of the all solid-state graphite/Li battery based on the 1% GO@LPS
electrolyte. The Liþ storage performance of the cell is investigated
by the cyclic voltammetry (CV) in the voltage range of 0.01e3 V (vs.
Liþ/Li). Similar CV behaviors in the initial five scans for the full cell
with 1% GO@LPS electrolyte are shown in Fig. 6(c). There is a small
peak at about 2.6 V, implying the side reactions between the
graphite and electrolyte. This result is in good agreement with the
previous publication that reported the oxidation of sulfide solid
state electrolyte by electronic percolation pathways in the presence
of carbon [46e49]. The cycling performance of graphite cathode at
50 mA g
1 is vividly demonstrated in Fig. 6(d). The discharge ca-
pacity of the cell with LPS is the lower and totally broken after 20
cycles. The 1% GO@LPS electrolyte delivers an initial discharge ca-
pacity of 350 mAh g
1. After 50 cycles, it still remains a specific
capacity of 260 mAh g
1, corresponding to a 75% capacity retention.
This excellent cycling stability is mainly due to the fact that GO
coating inhibits the Li dendrite growth and the interfacial reaction
between the solid electrolyte and Li metal. Fig. 7(a) and b shows the
cycling performances of the Li/LPS/LCO and Li/1% GO@LPS/LCO cell
at 0.1 C. The initial discharge capacity of Li/1% GO@LPS/LCO cell is
110 mAh g
1. After 100 cycles, the discharge capacity still retains
80 mAh g
1 with a capacity retention of 72.7%. In contrast, the bare
Li/LPS/LCO cell only exhibits 2.5 mAh g
1 after 100 cycles. With the
GO coating sulfide solid electrolyte, the Li/1% GO@LPS/LCO cell
shows the excellent electrochemical cycle performance, which is
agree with the results of the symmetrical Li/SE/Li cell test. This
excellent cycling stability is mainly due to the fact that GO coating
inhibits the Li dendrite growth and the interfacial reaction between
the solid electrolyte and Li metal.
4. Conclusions
In summary, GO and LPS composite solid electrolytes were
successfully synthesized using a solution synthesis method. With
1% GO addition, the ionic conductivity of the LPS solid electrolyte
get increased. Assembled half and whole cells show improved
performance and excellent cycling stability with the 1% GO/LPS
58
Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59
electrolyte due to the protection of GO for LPS from the reaction
with Li metal as well as the guidance for the deposition of Li metal.
The assembled Li/1% GO@Li7P3S11/Li symmetrical cell can stably
plating/stripping for over 300 cycles at 0.1 mA cm
2 at 25  C.
Coupled with graphite, the full cell exhibits a high initial reversible
capacity and excellent cycling stability. This facile method not only
deal with the interfacial issues between the Li anode and the sulfide
solid electrolyte, but also the interfacial issues created between the
Li dendrites within the bulk solid electrolyte, which provides a full
protection for LPS from attack of Li dendrites during cycling. Our
study paves the way for addressing the issues of interfacial stability
between the sulfide solid electrolyte and lithium metal for their
application in the all solid state batteries.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Jianwei Li: Formal analysis, Writing e original draft, Experi-
mental design, Materials syntheses, Date analysis, Writing the
original draft preparation. Yuanyuan Li: Formal analysis, Supervi-
sion, Materials syntheses, Date analysis and Supervise Review. Jun
Cheng: Supervision, Writing e review & editing. Qing Sun: Su-
pervision, Writing e review & editing. Linna Dai: Supervision,
Writing e review & editing, Supervise Review and Editing.
Xiangkun Nie: Formal analysis, assisted with date analysis. Lina
Chen: Writing e review & editing. Guifang Han: Writing e review
& editing, Materials characterization and Editing. Lijie Ci: Super-
vision, Methodology, Data curation, Conceptualization, Writing e
review & editing, Funding acquisition.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work was financially supported by High-level Talents’
Discipline Construction Fund of Shandong University (No.
31370089963078), Shandong Provincial Science and Technology
Major Project (Nos. 2016GGX104001, 2017CXGC1010, and
2018JMRH0211), the Fundamental Research Funds of Shandong
University (Nos. 2016JC005, 2017JC042 and 2017JC010), the Natural
Science Foundation of Shandong Province (No. ZR2017MEM002),
and School Research Startup Expenses of Harbin Institute of Tech-
nology (Shenzhen) (DD29100027), Financial support from State
J. Li, Y. Li, J. Cheng et al.
Key Laboratory of Advanced Welding and Joining, School of Mate-
rials Science and Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology
(HX20200170).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2021.01.159.
References
[1] C. Sun, J. Liu, Y. Gong, D.P. Wilkinson, J. Zhang, Recent advances in all-solid-
state rechargeable lithium batteries, Nano Energy 33 (2017) 363e386.
[2] A. Mauger, M. Armand, C.M. Julien, K. Zaghib, Challenges and issues facing
lithium metal for solid-state rechargeable batteries, J. Power Sources 353
(2017) 333e342.
[3] D. Cao, X. Sun, Q. Li, A. Natan, P. Xiang, H. Zhu, Lithium dendrite in all-solid-
state batteries: growth mechanisms, suppression strategies, and character-
izations, Matter 3 (2020) 57e94.
[4] F. Mo, J. Ruan, S. Sun, Z. Lian, S. Yang, X. Yue, Y. Song, Y.N. Zhou, F. Fang, G. Sun,
S. Peng, D. Sun, Inside or outside: origin of lithium dendrite formation of all
solid-state electrolytes, Adv. Energy Mater. (2019) 1902123.
[5] M. Shoji, E.J. Cheng, T. Kimura, K. Kanamura, Recent progress for all solid state
battery using sulfide and oxide solid electrolytes, J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 52
(2019) 103001.
[6] J. Liang, J. Luo, Q. Sun, X. Yang, R. Li, X. Sun, Recent progress on solid-state
hybrid electrolytes for solid-state lithium batteries, Energy Storage Mater.
(2019) 308e334.
[7] M. Du, K. Liao, Q. Lu, Z. Shao, Recent advances in the interface engineering of
solid-state Li-ion batteries with artificial buffer layers: challenges, materials,
construction, and characterization, Energy Environ. Sci. (2019) 1780e1804.
[8] S. Xia, X. Wu, Z. Zhang, Y. Cui, W. Liu, Practical challenges and future per-
spectives of all-solid-state lithium-metal batteries, Inside Chem. (2018)
753e785.
[9] B. Li, Q. Su, L. Yu, D. Wang, S. Ding, M. Zhang, G. Du, B. Xu, Li0.35La0.55TiO3
nanofibers enhanced poly(vinylidene fluoride)-based composite polymer
electrolytes for all-solid-state batteries, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces (2019)
42206e42213.
[10] F. Lu, Y. Pang, M. Zhu, F. Han, J. Yang, F. Fang, D. Sun, S. Zheng, C. Wang, A high-
performance Li-B-H electrolyte for all-solid-state Li batteries, Adv. Funct.
Mater. (2019) 1809219.
[11] Y. Zhao, J. Yan, W. Cai, Y. Lai, J. Song, J. Yu, B. Ding, Elastic and well-aligned
ceramic LLZO nanofiber based electrolytes for solid-state lithium batteries,
Energy Storage Mater (2019) 306e313.
[12] D. Liu, W. Zhu, Z. Feng, A. Guerfi, A. Vijh, K. Zaghib, Recent progress in sulfide-
based solid electrolytes for Li-ion batteries, Mater. Sci. Eng. B 213 (2016)
169e176.
€
[13] O.U. Kudu, T. Famprikis, B. Fleutot, M.-D. Braida, T. Le Mercier, M.S. Islam,
C. Masquelier, A review of structural properties and synthesis methods of
solid electrolyte materials in the Li2S-P2S5 binary system, J. Power Sources 407
(2018) 31e43.
[14] Q. Zhang, D. Cao, Y. Ma, A. Natan, P. Aurora, H. Zhu, Sulfide-based solid-state
electrolytes: synthesis, stability, and potential for all-solid-state batteries,
Adv. Mater. (2019) 1901131.
[15] J. Lau, R.H. DeBlock, D.M. Butts, D.S. Ashby, C.S. Choi, B.S. Dunn, Sulfide solid
electrolytes for lithium battery applications, Adv. Energy Mater. 8 (2018)
1800933.
[16] W. Zhang, T. Leichtweiss, S.P. Culver, R. Koerver, D. Das, D.A. Weber,
W.G. Zeier, J. Janek, The detrimental effects of carbon additives in Li10GeP2S12-
based solid-state batteries, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 9 (2017)
35888e35896.
[17] P. Wang, H. Liu, S. Patel, X. Feng, P.-H. Chien, Y. Wang, Y.-Y. Hu, Fast ion
conduction and its origin in Li6exPS5exBr1þx, Chem. Mater. 32 (2020)
3833e3840.
[18] X. Feng, P.-H. Chien, Y. Wang, S. Patel, P. Wang, H. Liu, M. Immediato-Scuotto,
Y.-Y. Hu, Enhanced ion conduction by enforcing structural disorder in Li-
deficient argyrodites Li6
xPS5
xCl1þx, Energy Storage Mater 30 (2020) 67e73.
[19] M.A. Kraft, S. Ohno, T. Zinkevich, R. Koerver, S.P. Culver, T. Fuchs, A. Senyshyn,
S. Indris, B.J. Morgan, W.G. Zeier, Inducing high ionic conductivity in the
lithium superionic argyrodites Li6þ xP1- xGe xS5I for all-solid-state batteries,
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 140 (2018) 16330e16339.
[20] F. Han, Y. Zhu, X. He, Y. Mo, C. Wang, Electrochemical stability of Li10GeP2-
S12and Li7La3Zr2O12Solid electrolytes, Adv. Energy Mater. 6 (2016) 1501590.
[21] X. Xu, G. Hou, X. Nie, Q. Ai, Y. Liu, J. Feng, L. Zhang, P. Si, S. Guo, L. Ci, Li7P3S11/
poly(ethylene oxide) hybrid solid electrolytes with excellent interfacial
compatibility for all-solid-state batteries, J. Power Sources 400 (2018)
212e217.
[22] D. Chang, K. Oh, S.J. Kim, K. Kang, Super-ionic conduction in solid-state
Li7P3S11-type sulfide electrolytes, Chem. Mater. 30 (2018) 8764e8770.
59
Carbon 177 (2021) 52e59
[23] R.C. Xu, X.H. Xia, Z.J. Yao, X.L. Wang, C.D. Gu, J.P. Tu, Preparation of Li7P3S 11
glass-ceramic electrolyte by dissolution-evaporation method for all-solid-
state lithium ion batteries, Electrochim. Acta 219 (2016) 235e240.
[24] S. Ito, M. Nakakita, Y. Aihara, T. Uehara, N. Machida, A synthesis of crystalline
Li7P3S11 solid electrolyte from 1,2-dimethoxyethane solvent, J. Power Sources
271 (2014) 342e345.
[25] Y. Wang, D. Lu, M. Bowden, P.Z. El Khoury, K.S. Han, Z.D. Deng, J. Xiao, J.-
G. Zhang, J. Liu, Mechanism of formation of Li7P3S11 solid electrolytes through
liquid phase synthesis, Chem. Mater. 30 (2018) 990e997.
[26] S.A. Pervez, M.A. Cambaz, V. Thangadurai, M. Fichtner, Interface in solid-state
lithium battery: challenges, progress, and outlook, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces
(2019) 22029e22050.
[27] R. Xu, F. Han, X. Ji, X. Fan, J. Tu, C. Wang, Interface engineering of sulfide
electrolytes for all-solid-state lithium batteries, Nano Energy 53 (2018)
958e966.
[28] Z. Cheng, M. Xie, Y. Mao, J. Ou, S. Zhang, Z. Zhao, J. Li, F. Fu, J. Wu, Y. Shen, D. Lu,
H. Chen, Building lithiophilic ion-conduction highways on garnet-type solid-
state Li þ conductors, Adv. Energy Mater. 10 (2020) 1904230.
[29] J. Steiger, G. Richter, M. Wenk, D. Kramer, R. Mo € nig, Comparison of the growth
of lithium filaments and dendrites under different conditions, Electrochem.
Commun. 50 (2015) 11e14.
[30] H. Liu, X.-B. Cheng, J.-Q. Huang, H. Yuan, Y. Lu, C. Yan, G.-L. Zhu, R. Xu, C.-
Z. Zhao, L.-P. Hou, C. He, S. Kaskel, Q. Zhang, Controlling dendrite growth in
solid-state electrolytes, ACS Energy Letters 5 (2020) 833e843.
[31] F. Han, A.S. Westover, J. Yue, X. Fan, F. Wang, M. Chi, D.N. Leonard, N.J. Dudney,
H. Wang, C. Wang, High electronic conductivity as the origin of lithium
dendrite formation within solid electrolytes, Nat. Energy 4 (2019) 187e196.
[32] X. Zhang, Y. Yang, Z. Zhou, Towards practical lithium-metal anodes, Chem.
Soc. Rev. 49 (2020) 3040e3071.
[33] Y. Zhang, T.-T. Zuo, J. Popovic, K. Lim, Y.-X. Yin, J. Maier, Y.-G. Guo, Towards
better Li metal anodes: challenges and strategies, Mater. Today 33 (2020)
56e74.
[34] Q. Ge, L. Zhou, Y.-m. Lian, X. Zhang, R. Chen, W. Yang, Metal-phosphide-doped
Li7P3S11 glass-ceramic electrolyte with high ionic conductivity for all-solid-
state lithium-sulfur batteries, Electrochem. Commun. 97 (2018) 100e104.
[35] J. Duan, W. Wu, A.M. Nolan, T. Wang, J. Wen, C. Hu, Y. Mo, W. Luo, Y. Huang,
Lithium-graphite paste: an interface compatible anode for solid-state batte-
ries, Adv. Mater. 31 (2019), e1807243.
[36] E. Matios, H. Wang, C. Wang, X. Hu, X. Lu, J. Luo, W. Li, Graphene regulated
ceramic electrolyte for solid-state sodium metal battery with superior elec-
trochemical stability, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11 (2019) 5064e5072.
[37] N. Li, K. Zhang, K. Xie, W. Wei, Y. Gao, M. Bai, Y. Gao, Q. Hou, C. Shen, Z. Xia,
B. Wei, Reduced-graphene-oxide-guided directional growth of planar lithium
layers, Adv. Mater. (2019), e1907079.
[38] A.A. Assegie, C.C. Chung, M.C. Tsai, W.N. Su, C.W. Chen, B.J. Hwang, Multilayer-
graphene-stabilized lithium deposition for anode-Free lithium-metal batte-
ries, Nanoscale 11 (2019) 2710e2720.
[39] M. Bai, K. Xie, K. Yuan, K. Zhang, N. Li, C. Shen, Y. Lai, R. Vajtai, P. Ajayan,
B. Wei, A scalable approach to dendrite-free lithium anodes via spontaneous
reduction of spray-coated graphene oxide layers, Adv. Mater. (2018),
e1801213.
[40] J. Li, X. Li, D. Xiong, L. Wang, D. Li, Enhanced capacitance of boron-doped
graphene aerogels for aqueous symmetric supercapacitors, Appl. Surf. Sci.
475 (2019) 285e293.
[41] Z. Lin, Z. Liu, W. Fu, N.J. Dudney, C. Liang, Lithium polysulfidophosphates: a
family of lithium-conducting sulfur-rich compounds for lithium-sulfur bat-
teries, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 52 (29) (2013) 7460e7463.
[42] R. Chen, T. Zhao, F. Wu, From a historic review to horizons beyond: lithium-
sulphur batteries run on the wheels, Chem. Commun. 51 (1) (2015) 18e33.
[43] S. Gao, J. Zhong, G. Xue, B. Wang, Ion conductivity improved polyethylene
oxide/lithium perchlorate electrolyte membranes modified by graphene ox-
ide, J. Membr. Sci. 470 (2014) 316e322.
[44] Z. Hu, X. Zhang, S. Chen, A graphene oxide and ionic liquid assisted anion-
immobilized polymer electrolyte with high ionic conductivity for dendrite-
free lithium metal batteries, J. Power Sources 477 (2020) 228754.
[45] J. Shim, D.-G. Kim, H.J. Kim, J.H. Lee, J.-H. Baik, J.-C. Lee, Novel composite
polymer electrolytes containing poly(ethylene glycol)-grafted graphene oxide
for all-solid-state lithium-ion battery applications, J. Mater. Chem. A 2 (34)
(2014) 13873e13883.
[46] S. Deng, Y. Sun, X. Li, Z. Ren, J. Liang, K. Doyle-Davis, J. Liang, W. Li, M. Norouzi
Banis, Q. Sun, R. Li, Y. Hu, H. Huang, L. Zhang, S. Lu, J. Luo, X. Sun, Eliminating
the detrimental effects of conductive agents in sulfide-based solid-state bat-
teries, ACS Energy Letters 5 (4) (2020) 1243e1251.
[47] Y.X. Yao, C. Yan, Q. Zhang, Emerging interfacial chemistry of graphite anodes
in lithium-ion batteries, Chem. Commun. 56 (93) (2020) 14570e14584.
[48] G. Maresca, A. Tsurumaki, N. Suzuki, T. Tsujimura, Y. Aihara, M. Assunta
Navarra, Improvement of graphite interfacial stability in all-solid-state cells
adopting sulfide glassy electrolytes, ChemElectroChem (2021) 689e696.
[49] J. Billaud, F. Bouville, T. Magrini, C. Villevieille, A.R. Studart, Magnetically
aligned graphite electrodes for high-rate performance Li-ion batteries, Nat.
Energy 1 (8) (2016).