Comparative analysis of the charge transfer processes of the Ru(NH3)63+/ Ru(NH3)62+ and Fe(CN)63-/ Fe(CN)64- redox couples on glassy carbon electrodes modified by different lipid layers

N. WILKE, A.M. BARUZZI

JOURNAL OF ELECTROANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY

Elsevier

Año: 2002 p. 67 - 76

0022-0728

Langmuir/Blodgett lipid films deposited onto glassy carbon electrodes were analyzed by comparing the voltammetric profiles of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 6 and Fe(CN)3 6 =Fe(CN)4 6 redox couples. The responses were correlated with the behavior of the lipid monolayers at the air j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 monolayers at the air j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 6 and Fe(CN)3 6 =Fe(CN)4 6 redox couples. The responses were correlated with the behavior of the lipid monolayers at the air j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 monolayers at the air j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 /Blodgett lipid films deposited onto glassy carbon electrodes were analyzed by comparing the voltammetric profiles of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 6 and Fe(CN)3 6 =Fe(CN)4 6 redox couples. The responses were correlated with the behavior of the lipid monolayers at the air j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 monolayers at the air j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 6 and Fe(CN)3 6 =Fe(CN)4 6 redox couples. The responses were correlated with the behavior of the lipid monolayers at the air j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 j water interface giving the same tendency in the compressibility factors as in the electrochemical blocking effect. Digital simulation of some current/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2/potential profiles was successfully done in the case of the Ru(NH3)3 6 =Ru(NH3)2 6 couple, which proved to be a better marker ion as it does not have the well known drawbacks of the Fe(CN)3 6 =Fe(CN)4 6 couple. A model which considers the effect of macroscopic inhomogeneities of the surface on the electrochemical response was used. 6 couple. A model which considers the effect of macroscopic inhomogeneities of the surface on the electrochemical response was used. couple, which proved to be a better marker ion as it does not have the well known drawbacks of the Fe(CN)3 6 =Fe(CN)4 6 couple. A model which considers the effect of macroscopic inhomogeneities of the surface on the electrochemical response was used.couple. A model which considers the effect of macroscopic inhomogeneities of the surface on the electrochemical response was used.