Paper detail

Warburg's impedance revisited

The derivation of Warburg's impedance presented in several books and scientific papers is reconsidered. It has been obtained by assuming that the total electric current across the sample is just due to the diffusion, and that the external potential applied to the electrode is responsible for an increase of the bulk density of charge described by Nernst's model. We show that these assumptions are not correct, and hence the proposed derivations questionable. A correct determination of the electrochemical impedance of a cell of an insulating material where are injected external charges of a given sign, when the diffusion and the displacement currents are taken into account, does not predict, in the high frequency region, for the real and imaginary parts of the impedance, the trends predicted by Warburg's impedance in the Nernstian approximation. The presented model can be generalized to the case of asymmetric cell, assuming boundary conditions physically sound.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.