急求审稿意见回复！！？审稿意见如下： The material in this paper is presented as "capacitive" material despite the fact that its electrochemical characteristics (e.g., cyclic voltammograms and charge/discharge curves) is analogous to that of a "battery" type material. In such case, it has little sense to talk about capacitance (in F/g) but capacity must be used instead (in C/g). True pseudocapacitive electrode materials display electrochemical behavior typical of that observed for a capacitive carbon electrode. The difference between these two classes of materials has been explained in the following articles: P. Simon et al, Perspective: Where do batteries end and supercapacitors begin? Science, 343, 1210-1211, 2014 and T.??Brousse et al., To Be or Not To Be Pseudocapacitive? Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 162 (5) A5185-A5189, 2015.??Unfortunately many confusing papers are reporting so called "pseudocapacitive behavior" of electroactive systems. While reading the manuscript, I would like to advise Editor and Authors that there is strong drive among experts in the area to make proper distinction between battery-type and capacitor-type systems. The manuscript presents the controversial definitions of the terms related to capacitors/supercapacitors. There is a general and fundamental difference between the mechanisms of operation of electrochemical capacitors and battery cells: for the double-layer type of capacitor, the charge storage process is non-Faradaic, i.e. ideally no electron transfer takes place across the electrode interface and the storage of electric charge and energy is electrostatic" (Conway BE (1999). Electrochemical supercapacitors. Scientific fundamentals and technological applications. Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers). The similar contrasting of the double layer capacitance charging with the charge transfer in faradaic processes in batteries is presented in electrochemical textbooks, e.g. in the classical textbook of Bard and Faulkner. I have found no solid argument in the manuscript to give up the classical electrochemistry in favor of the author's approach. 我做的是钴酸镍材料用于超级电容器，想问一下大家这样的审稿意见如何回复！急！查看更多5个回答 . 2人已关注
油酸修饰Fe3O4聚苯乙烯合成总是不均一，不知道各位有没有好的方法？先使用共沉淀法制备了油酸修饰的Fe3O4，粒径大概在10nm左右，实验方法如下FeCl3 ·6H2O + FeCl2 ·4H2O + Water + NH3 ·H2OKeep：30 min? ?50℃??Put：Oleic AcidKeep：60 min? ?70℃??Collected by a strong magnet然后使用乙醇清洗，5到10次，使表面的油酸变成单层油酸。然后使用0.176g Fe3O4、1ml 苯乙烯单体 （已用NaoH和水清洗）、0.1g 环己烷，此为油相，28HKz的超声仪超声5min。0.08g SDS、0.008g 碳酸氢钠 、0.0008g 罗丹明B、30ml 超纯水 混合后此为水相将水相、油相、0.08gDVB、混合，在冰水浴下28Hkz超声仪超声10min然后转入水浴中70度，通氮气，冷凝管、机械搅拌。通氮气15分钟后，加入KPS（0.015g溶于0.5ml水中）然后分别反应3h、5h、8h、10h、15h。搅拌速度有300rpm、500rpm、900rpm。我需要合成100nm均一的核壳结构的小球，磁性。但现在为止都是特别不均一，合成时间3h的时候，基本不成球，大部分都是散的，但是仍然可以看到个别微米大的球，5h也是，可以看到很大的球，TEM都没法拍，到8h基本上都成球了，但是大小特别不均一。后面又将Fe3O4的量降到0.088g也是不均一。参考文献是1、Developing a Hybrid Emulsion Polymerization System to Synthesize Fe3O4/Polystyrene Latexes with Narrow Size Distribution and High Magnetite Content2、Preparation of Fe3O4/polystyrene composite particles from monolayer oleic acid modified Fe3O4 nanoparticles via miniemulsion polymerization*（基本上完全按照次文献参数）3、Ferroferric oxide/polystyrene (Fe3O4/PS) superparamagnetic nanocomposite via facile in situ bulk radical polymerization8h 500rpm10h 300rpm15h 300rpm使用AIBN合成0.088gFe3O4，500rpm，8h.jpg查看更多5个回答 . 23人已关注
第1天
关注盖德视界
添加小助手
