4.5 Article

Analysis of electrochemical impedance of polyaniline films prepared by galvanostatic, potentiostatic and potentiodynamic methods

期刊

SYNTHETIC METALS
卷 148, 期 3, 页码 275-286

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.synthmet.2004.10.010

关键词

polyaniline; impedance; transmission line model; capacitance; electronic resistance; ionic resistance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyaniline (PANI) films have been deposited on stainless steel (SS) substrate by galvanostatic, potentiostatic and potentiodynamic methods. Electrochemical impedance spectra of the electrodes have been analyzed using a transmission line model consisting of two rails of finite resistances. The impedance spectra of the galvanostatically prepared electrodes are similar in shape to those of potentiostatically grown electrodes. The resistance of aqueous pore (R-aq) due to ionic doping-dedoping process is greater than the resistance (R-p) of electronic charge-transfer on polymer chain. These parameters exhibit an increase in magnitude with thickness of PANI, as expected from the transmission line theory. The shape of impedance spectra of potentiodynamically grown PANI, however, is different and its R-aq less than or equal to R-p. The impedance parameters of potentiodynamically prepared PANI/SS electrodes have been found to depend on the sweep rate used for the deposition of PANI. Several possible explanations have been discussed to understand the influence of sweep rate during deposition on impedance parameters of the electrodes. In contrast to the behavior of PANI deposited by galvanostatic and potentiostatic methods, R-p decreases with an increase in thickness of PANI deposited by the potentiodynamic method. The effect of concentration of aniline used for the deposition of PANI on impedance parameters has also been studied. The results of capacitance of PANI obtained from the ac impedance studies have been found to be comparable with those obtained from the cyclic voltammetric studies. (C) 2004 Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据