| ²é¿´: 411 | »Ø¸´: 1 | ||
beobeojintaoÒø³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
|
[ÇóÖú]
why the cell impedance is equivalent to the electrode impedance ÒÑÓÐ1È˲ÎÓë
|
|
ͶÁËÆªÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒÓÃŦ¿Ûµç³ØÔÚAUto -Lab ÉÏ×öµÄEIS£¬Éó¸åÒâ¼ûÏÂÀ´ÁË£» È»ºóÎÒÓÃÄâºÏ ÄâºÏµÄµç·£¬ÄâºÏ³ö¶ÔÓ¦µÄRct Rf µÈÖµ£¬¿´µ½Õâ¸ö»Ø¸´ºÜÃÔ»ó°¡£¬ÎÒ¾õµÃÕâ¿éºÃÏñûÎÊÌâ°É¡£ the impedance apparently was measured in a two-electrode arrangement yielding cell and not electrode impedances, whereas the equivalent circuit and all discussion implies, that electrode impedances were measured and evaluated. This is a fundamental contradiction, it is unacceptable and basically wrong. Either you have to explain why the cell impedance is equivalent to the electrode impedance - hard to believe - or your better remove this section. |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
ºÏ·Ê¹¤Òµ´óѧ854ÒÇÆ÷¼¼Êõ×ÛºÏרҵ¿Î¿¼ÑÐ
ÒѾÓÐ0È˻ظ´
27Äêµç»¯Ñ§²©Ê¿±ÏÒµ£¬ÏëÕÒº£ÍâQSǰ50µÄ¸ßУ¶Á²©ºóÇóÍÆ¼ö
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
ÎïÀí»¯Ñ§ÂÛÎÄÈóÉ«/·ÒëÔõôÊÕ·Ñ?
ÒѾÓÐ64È˻ظ´
27Äêµç³Ø/²ÄÁÏÀ಩ʿÉêÇë
ÒѾÓÐ2È˻ظ´
2027Ä격ʿÉêÇë»òת²©¿ÆÑÐÖúÀí ÇóÍÆ¼ö
ÒѾÓÐ1È˻ظ´
ÇëÎÊËÓÐ2025×îÐÂÓ°ÏìÒò×ÓExcel±í£¿½ð±ÒÇóÖú£¡
ÒѾÓÐ53È˻ظ´
ÂÈ»¯ÄÆÓëÓлú»ÇËá·ÖÀë
ÒѾÓÐ1È˻ظ´
Èðµä-²©ºó-¹Ì̬µç³Ø-Õ³½á¼Á-ï®Àë×Óµç³Ø·½Ïò
ÒѾÓÐ53È˻ظ´
¹ã¶«Ê¡ÃæÉÏÓÐʲô¶¯Ì¬Ã´£¬É¶Ê±ºò¹«²¼Ñ½£¿
ÒѾÓÐ1È˻ظ´
ºúç÷
Ìú¸Ëľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- ECEPI: 3
- Ó¦Öú: 830 (²©ºó)
- ½ð±Ò: 10236.1
- É¢½ð: 500
- ºì»¨: 68
- Ìû×Ó: 2977
- ÔÚÏß: 881.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 1346956
- ×¢²á: 2011-07-15
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ÓлúºÏ³É

2Â¥2014-11-16 14:19:30









»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥
ͶƱ:
30