Science Advances

Supplementary Materials

This PDF file includes:

  • Fig. S1. Microstructural study of different cathodes.
  • Fig. S2. High-resolution SEM images of the cross-linking cathode.
  • Fig. S3. Cross-sectional SEM images of cathodes.
  • Fig. S4. Images of ET cathode A and cross-linking cathode C.
  • Fig. S5. Peeling test on several different cathodes.
  • Fig. S6. Raman spectroscopy.
  • Fig. S7. Photographs of slurries of wet mixing and dry mixing cathodes.
  • Fig. S8. An XPS study: Evaluation of the binder-filler interactions.
  • Fig. S9. Electrical conductivity data of different cathodes.
  • Fig. S10. Cycling performance of different high-loading sulfur cathodes.
  • Fig. S11. Cycling performance of high- and ultrahigh-loading ET cathodes.
  • Fig. S12. Plot of lithium excess percentage versus areal capacity of sulfur cathode.
  • Fig. S13. Cell-level energy metrics in pouch cell configuration.
  • Fig. S14. Charge-discharge profile of the ET cathode in pouch cell configuration.
  • Fig. S15. Postmortem analysis of a cycled pouch cell.
  • Fig. S16. Pore-size distribution and isotherms of the used conductive agents.
  • Fig. S17. Characterization and cycling performance of a cathode fabricated with crystalline sulfur.
  • Fig. S18. SEM images of a PVDF-based cathode fabricated via the recipe of dry mixing/minimally dissolved binder.
  • Fig. S19. Cycling performance of sulfur cathodes with minimally dissolved PVDF binder.
  • Fig. S20. SEM images of cathodes fabricated via traditional wet mixing method using PVDF and Gum Arabic binder.
  • Fig. S21. High-resolution SEM images of the cycled ET cathode.
  • Fig. S22. FIB cross-sectional SEM images of the cycled ET cathode.
  • Fig. S23. FIB cross-sectional SEM images of the cycled wet mixing cathode.
  • Table S1. Elemental quantification derived from XPS survey spectra.

Download PDF

Files in this Data Supplement: