Investigation of the Properties of Anode Electrodes for Lithium–Ion Batteries Manufactured Using Cu, and Si-Coated Carbon Nanowall Materials
, Seokhun Kwon 1, Hyunil Kang 1, Jang Myoun Ko 2, Junghyun Kim 3 and Wonseok Choi 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please see the attachment.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Reviewer#1: The manuscript ISSN 1996-1073 reports a study of binder-free Li-ion battery anodes for lithium-ion battery. The description in the manuscript is in detail, and I recommend the publication of this manuscript in the Energies after a major revision. However, the following points may be considered before the manuscript is accepted, and make it more readable and enlightened.
1. The synthesis method used in the article is very good, but why there is still no charging and discharging platform in the negative electrode with silicon, and the capacity is not high?
2. Some of the statements in the article lack data or literature support, For example, "The D peak was observed at 1343-1345 cm-1, the pres-ence of the D band is not only due to the inside the CNWs,but also a high fraction of the open edges of small-size. But also a high fraction of the open edges of small-size."Additionally, a characteristic feature of CNW is that the D peak was larger than the G peak.", please explain in detail.
3. Why is there no corresponding Raman peak when copper or silicon compounds are added to the Raman diagram?
4. In CV results, why is there no corresponding REDOX peak after adding copper or silicon?
5. In Figure 8, why is there little difference between the electric quantity of CNW and Cu/CNW?
6. “Owing to the uniform distribution of all Cu and Si nanoparticles in the graphite matrices and the considerable volume of Cu and Si that was synthesized at the ends of the CNWs, a buffer for the insertion and extraction of lithium ions can be established.” How to prove good distribution, please provide corresponding TEM results.
7. The morphology and crystallinity of the products before and after the reaction should be determined by SEM and XRD.
8. The reaction mechanism should be discussed in detail and given through pictures.
9. Some important work could be cited “Energy Storage Mater., 2021, 39: 354-364; ACS Appl. Energy Mater., 2021, 4(2): 1548-1559; Energy Storage Materials, 2021, 36: 365-375; J. Mater. Chem. A, 2021, 9(32): 17451-17458; Chemical Engineering Journal, 2019, 362: 818-829.”
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript investigates the properties of carbon nanowalls coated with Cu and Si as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Carbon nanowall was synthesized with the PECVD method and electrochemical characterization was conducted. Following are my suggestions for further improvement:
1. What are the common approaches for CNW synthesis besides PECVD, and what are their advantages and disadvantages?
2. In the introduction, “Numerous studies have discovered using copper (Cu) coatings on graphite materials can suppress volume expansion and increase electronic conductivity for anode materials of LIBs.” Needs reference.
3. Section 3.1, “CNW sample manufactured using PECVD equipment at 550oC for 20 min has the optimal morphology and microstructure”. What are the criteria for “optimal morphology and microstructures”?
4. Section 3.1, “However, the walls of the CNWs were thickened as a result of the particles penetrating all samples to a depth of around 0.6 m from the CNW surfaces”. I believe the unit should be 0.6 um.
5. More details are needed for the EIS analysis. What model is used in the EIS analysis and what are the values of RSEI?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
My mentioned problems have been answered and resolved, the manuscript can be accepted in present form.
