Abstract
In the literature, the electric modulus representation has been used to provide comparative analysis of the ion transport properties in different ion-conducting materials. In this paper we show that the modulus representation is not a suitable tool for such purposes. Our arguments derive from an examination of the scaling properties of both the ac conductivity σ*(ν) and the modulus M*(ν) which demonstrates how scaling that is inherent in σ*(ν) is lost in M*(ν) by inclusion of the high frequency permittivity ε′(∞), the latter quantity being unrelated to ion transport processes. Furthermore, we show how highly regarded shape changes of the modulus that occur with varying ion concentration are merely a manifestation of including ε′(∞) in the definition of M*(ν). We conclude then that the electric modulus formalism has resulted in misleading interpretations of the ion dynamics and, hence, should be discouraged.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 024301 |
| Pages (from-to) | 243011-243017 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics |
| Volume | 63 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| State | Published - 2001 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Condensed Matter Physics
Cite this
Ionic conduction in solids : Comparing conductivity and modulus representations with regard to scaling properties. / Sidebottom, David L.; Roling, B.; Funke, K.
In: Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, Vol. 63, No. 2, 024301, 2001, p. 243011-243017.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Ionic conduction in solids
T2 - Comparing conductivity and modulus representations with regard to scaling properties
AU - Sidebottom, David L.
AU - Roling, B.
AU - Funke, K.
PY - 2001
Y1 - 2001
N2 - In the literature, the electric modulus representation has been used to provide comparative analysis of the ion transport properties in different ion-conducting materials. In this paper we show that the modulus representation is not a suitable tool for such purposes. Our arguments derive from an examination of the scaling properties of both the ac conductivity σ*(ν) and the modulus M*(ν) which demonstrates how scaling that is inherent in σ*(ν) is lost in M*(ν) by inclusion of the high frequency permittivity ε′(∞), the latter quantity being unrelated to ion transport processes. Furthermore, we show how highly regarded shape changes of the modulus that occur with varying ion concentration are merely a manifestation of including ε′(∞) in the definition of M*(ν). We conclude then that the electric modulus formalism has resulted in misleading interpretations of the ion dynamics and, hence, should be discouraged.
AB - In the literature, the electric modulus representation has been used to provide comparative analysis of the ion transport properties in different ion-conducting materials. In this paper we show that the modulus representation is not a suitable tool for such purposes. Our arguments derive from an examination of the scaling properties of both the ac conductivity σ*(ν) and the modulus M*(ν) which demonstrates how scaling that is inherent in σ*(ν) is lost in M*(ν) by inclusion of the high frequency permittivity ε′(∞), the latter quantity being unrelated to ion transport processes. Furthermore, we show how highly regarded shape changes of the modulus that occur with varying ion concentration are merely a manifestation of including ε′(∞) in the definition of M*(ν). We conclude then that the electric modulus formalism has resulted in misleading interpretations of the ion dynamics and, hence, should be discouraged.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035137823&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035137823&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
VL - 63
SP - 243011
EP - 243017
JO - Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics
JF - Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics
SN - 1098-0121
IS - 2
M1 - 024301
ER -