Immittance Data Validation using Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) Computation – Synthetic and Experimental Examples. Issue 11 (27th September 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Malkow, T.; Papakonstantinou, G.; Pilenga, A.; Grahl‐Madsen, L.; Tsotridis, G.
• Is Part Of: ChemElectroChem. Volume 4:Issue 11(2017)
• Page Start: 2771
• Page End: 2776
• Publication Date: 2017-09-27
• Subjects: Boundedness -- causality -- continuity -- linearity -- stability; Electrochemistry -- Periodicals; 541.37
• DOI: 10.1002/celc.201700629
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2196-0216

Abstract

Abstract: Exact data of an electric circuit (EC) model of RLC (resistor, inductor, capacitor) elements representing rational immittance of LTI (linear, time invariant) systems are numerically Fourier transformed to demonstrate within error bounds applicability of the Hilbert integral tranform (HT) and Kramers‐Kronig (KK) integral tranform (KKT) method. Immittance spectroscopy (IS) data are validated for their HT (KKT) compliance using non‐equispaced fast Fourier transformation (NFFT) computations. Failing of HT (KKT) testing may not only stem from non‐compliance with causality, stability and linearity which are readily distinguished using anti HT (KKT) relations. It could also indicate violation of uniform boundedness to be overcome either by using singly or multiply subtracted KK transform (SSKK or MSKK) or by seeking KKT of the same set of data at a complementary immit‐ tance level. Experimental IS data of a fuel cell (FC) are also numerically HT (KKT) validated by NFFT assessing whether LTI principles are met. Figures of merit are suggested to measure success in numerical validation of IS data. Abstract : Non‐equispaced fast Fourier transformation (NFFT) computations demonstrate validation of immittance data on synthetic and experimental examples representing ideal and real electrochemical systems. Validation is with respect to compliance for the fundamental principles of LTI (linear, time invariant) systems enshrined in the Hilbert and Kramers‐Kronig integral transform relations. Figures of merit are suggested to measure validation success.