Over the past decades, three-dimensional (3D) printing has rapidly evolved from methods mostly suitable for producing functional or DIY prototypes to a set of highly precise and reproducible industrial-grade techniques. At present, additive manufacturing is employed in various industries from medicine, education, prosthetics and fashion to architecture, automotive and aerospace sectors(1).

A combination of a unique flexibility of computer-aided design, high accuracy, repeatability, and speed of modern 3D printers with a wide range of printable materials have attracted a great interest of the electrochemical energy storage research community(2-5). All the components of electrochemical energy storage devices (EESD), such as casing, current collectors, active materials, separator, and even entire batteries(6) have been successfully 3D printed using a variety of techniques, e.g. material extrusion and jetting, photopolymerization, powder fusion, etc.(2, 7). In comparison to conventional manufacturing methods, 3D printing offers a greater design freedom and versatility, and facilitates the development of complex high surface area 3D structures, which can be particularly beneficial for EESDs(8-10).

Herein, we designed several versions of coin-type cells with engineered porous current collectors, which can be utilized for the fabrication of Li-ion, Li–S batteries and supercapacitors. The cell parts have been 3D printed using a commercial SLA 3D printer with two types of photopolymerizable resin. The current collector lattices were metalized by sputter deposition of Au or Ni. The fidelity of 3D printed objects and the quality of coating was evaluated by optical and scanning electron microscopy. We compare different design solutions for ease of handling and battery electrochemical performance using a model aqueous Li-ion system with FePO₄·2H₂O and LiMn₂O₄ as anode and cathode materials, respectively(11). We discuss charge / discharge cycle life performance under different cycling modes, rate capability, self-discharge, and the feasibility of active material recycling.

References

(1). N. Shahrubudin, T. C. Lee, and R. Ramlan, Procedia Manufacturing, 35, 1286 (2019).

(2). V. Egorov, U. Gulzar, Y. Zhang, S. Breen, and C. O'Dwyer, Adv. Mater., 32, 2000556 (2020).

(3). P. Chang, H. Mei, S. Zhou, K. G. Dassios, and L. Cheng, J. Mater. Chem. A, 7, 4230 (2019).

(4). M. P. Browne, E. Redondo, and M. Pumera, Chem. Rev., 120, 2783 (2020).

(5). Y. Pang, Y. Cao, Y. Chu, M. Liu, K. Snyder, D. MacKenzie, and C. Cao, Adv. Funct. Mater., 1906244 (2019).

(6). C. Reyes, R. Somogyi, S. Niu, M. A. Cruz, F. Yang, M. J. Catenacci, C. P. Rhodes, and B. J. Wiley, ACS Appl. Energy Mater., 1, 5268 (2018).

(7). U. Gulzar, C. Glynn, and C. O'Dwyer, Curr. Opin. Electrochem., 20, 46 (2020).

(8). V. Egorov and C. O'Dwyer, Curr. Opin. Electrochem., 21, 201 (2020).

(9). J. H. Pikul and J. W. Long, MRS Bulletin, 44, 789 (2019).

(10). X. Tian and K. Zhou, Nanoscale, 12, 7416 (2020).

(11). Y. Wang, S.-Z. Yang, Y. You, Z. Feng, W. Zhu, V. Gariépy, J. Xia, B. Commarieu, A. Darwiche, A. Guerfi, and K. Zaghib, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 10, 7061 (2018).

Figure 1 (a) 3D rendered images of the proposed cell designs. (b) Photographs of the actual 3D printed cells and current collectors. (c) SEM image (left) and Au EDX mapping (right) of a gold coated porous current collector. (d) Cycling performance of a Type II aqueous Li-ion cell.