24小时热门版块排行榜

>论坛更新日志 (4291)
>硕博家园 (1053)
>虫友互识 (1050)
>文献求助 (299)
>导师招生 (276)
>休闲灌水 (166)
>考博 (148)
>博后之家 (127)
>海外博后 (100)
>学术会议 (85)
>论文投稿 (83)
>招聘信息布告栏 (73)
>催化 (37)
>考研 (30)
>绿色求助(高悬赏) (26)
>基金申请 (22)

返回列表

liguo.920

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 1 (幼儿园)
金币: 102.6
帖子: 13
在线: 44.8小时
虫号: 1088499
注册: 2010-09-03
专业: 污染控制化学

[求助] 电化学阻抗谱分析求助,急啊！

本人最近投了一篇JSEL杂志，一位审稿人对文章中阻抗谱分析部分返回的意见如下：
Unfortunately, the discussion of impedance measurements is always unsatisfaying.
There is a fundamental misunderstanding about the concept of constant phase element (CPE). The definition given by Eq.2 is correct, but Cdl is never in unit of Farad but in Fs^n, because pulsation w is in s^-1, and w^n in s^-n!
Then comparing Cdl values corresponding to different values of n is totally meaningless. As a consequence, Table 1 is not acceptable in the present form for the following reasons:
1/ Cdl is not in mF and cannot be identified as the double layer capacitance;
2/ n values are of the order of 0.7 suggesting the layer to be porous: the CPE representation leads to a good fit but remains purely formal without direct information about physical quantities. More sophisticated impedance models could be considered to get information on interfacial quantities of interest.
3/ The Cf parameter with so high values is hardly attribuable to an actual film capacitance. Knowing that the dielectric permittivity of tin oxide turns around 10, a 1 m thick layer would have a 10 nF/cm2 capacitance, and 10 F/cm2 if 1 nm thick only! Never in mF.
In conclusion, frequency analysis of impedance data according to the electrical circuit in Fig.5 is purely formal, with the consequence that the parameters in Table 1 have no physical meaning.
看到审稿意见我顿时懵了，我对这么专业的EIS分析实在是不懂啊。本人做的是二氧化锡电极材料，在钛基底表面涂覆一中间层后又涂覆二氧化锡表面层。有没有哪位专业人士能帮忙分析一下，因有些具体数据不方便上传，可单独联系。万分感谢！！！急啊！

回复此楼