% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Stolz:911755,
      author       = {Stolz, Lukas and Gaberšček, Miran and Winter, Martin and
                      Kasnatscheew, Johannes},
      title        = {{D}ifferent {E}fforts but {S}imilar {I}nsights in {B}attery
                      ${R}\&{D}:$ {E}lectrochemical {I}mpedance {S}pectroscopy vs
                      {G}alvanostatic ({C}onstant {C}urrent) {T}echnique},
      journal      = {Chemistry of materials},
      volume       = {34},
      number       = {23},
      issn         = {0897-4756},
      address      = {Washington, DC},
      publisher    = {American Chemical Society},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2022-05007},
      pages        = {10272 - 10278},
      year         = {2022},
      abstract     = {Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) using
                      alternating currents is a widely established technique to
                      investigate kinetic aspects of batteries and their
                      components, though it requires an interruption of battery
                      operation with extra measurement time and effort. In this
                      work, EIS is compared with the conventional galvanostatic
                      (constant current) technique, which is based on direct
                      currents, being the standard operation mode of batteries.
                      Data from constant current measurements not only are
                      representing application conditions but also are
                      automatically and continuously generated during routine
                      charge/discharge processes, i.e., without extra measurement
                      efforts, and do give kinetic insights via the characteristic
                      overvoltage (= resistance-reasoned voltage rise/decrease),
                      as well. In fact, distinguishing between even very similar
                      values for ohmic (RΩ), charge transfer (Rct), and mass
                      transport (Rmt) resistances can be done via analysis of
                      overvoltage data from constant current measurements, as
                      exemplarily demonstrated in symmetric Li||Li and
                      LiNi0.6Mn0.2Co0.2O2 (NMC622)||Li cells with poly(ethylene
                      oxide)-based solid polymer electrolyte, finally proving
                      their validity. From a practical point of view,
                      direct-current methods can be beneficial for $R\&D$ of
                      kinetic aspects in batteries, as data is directly obtained
                      and, thus, application-oriented.},
      cin          = {IEK-12},
      ddc          = {540},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-12-20141217},
      pnm          = {1221 - Fundamentals and Materials (POF4-122)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1221},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000928908600001},
      doi          = {10.1021/acs.chemmater.2c02376},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/911755},
}