Calculation of liquid junction potentials

It is apparent that the difference between the e.m.f. s of the cells considered in sections 5.7.1 and 5.7.2 gives the liquid junction potential involved in the former Thus, 

This last equation makes clear the function of a salt bridge when eliminating a liquid junction potential. If the electrolyte is chosen such that t- = t+ then E j = 0. The general form of Equation (5.37) is 

---

Cells with Liquid Junctions and Elimination of Junction Potentials. When electrochemical cells are employed to obtain thermodynamic data, high accuracy ( 0.05 mV) requires the use of cells that are free from liquid junction (in the sense that the construction of the cell does not involve bringing into contact two or more distinctly different electrolyte solutions). Otherwise, the previously discussed uncertainties in the calculation of liquid-junction potentials will limit the accuracy of the data. 

Due to the different mobilities, concentration gradients and thus potential gradients will be established. In actual measurements these potentials will be added to the electrode potentials. A calculation of liquid junction potential is possible with the -> Henderson equation. As liquid junction potential is an undesired addition in most cases, methods to suppress liquid junction potential like -> salt bridge are employed. (See also -> diffusion potentials, -> electrolyte junction, -> flowing junctions, and -> Maclnnes.)... 

Morf, W.E. (1977) Calculation of liquid-junction potentials and membrane-potentials on basis of Planck theory. Analytical Chemistry, 49, 810-813. 

Electrochemical methods covered in this chapter include poten-tiometry, coulometry, and voltammetry. Potentiometric methods are based on the measurement of an electrochemical cell s potential when only a negligible current is allowed to flow, fn principle the Nernst equation can be used to calculate the concentration of species in the electrochemical cell by measuring its potential and solving the Nernst equation the presence of liquid junction potentials, however, necessitates the use of an external standardization or the use of standard additions. 

In many calculations the hydrogen ion concentration is more accessible than the activity. For example, the electroneutrality condition is written in terms of concentrations rather than activities. Also, from stoichiometric considerations, the concentrations of solution components are often directly available. Therefore, the hydrogen ion concentration is most readily calculated from equilibrium constants written in terms of concentration. When a comparison of hydrogen ion concentrations with measured pH values is required (in calculation of equilibrium constants, for example), an estimate of the hydrogen ion activity coeflScient can be made by application of the Debye-Huckel theory if necessary, an estimate of liquid-junction potentials also can be made. Alternatively, the glass electrode can be calibrated with solutions of known hydrogen ion concentration and constant ionic strength. " ... 

All that one can hope to do by such a method is to determine pH values which are consistent with those calculated from thermodynamic constants using Equation (6.38). Thus, it is necessary to reassess the values of potential adopted by reference electrodes used for this purpose and also to take appropriate account of liquid junction potentials. 

In the derivation of the formula for calculating the liquid junction potential, the electric work done in separating the charges is set equal to the work of diffusion that is, the change in chemical potential arising from the diffusion of the ions. Only after making certain approximations can one arrive at the so-called Henderson solution [56] of the Nernst-Planck equation [57] ... 

An electrode potential varies with the concentration of the ions in the solution. Hence two electrodes of the same metal, but immersed in solutions containing different concentrations of its ions, may form a cell. Such a cell is termed a concentration cell. The e.m.f. of the cell will be the algebraic difference of the two potentials, if a salt bridge be inserted to eliminate the liquid-liquid junction potential. It may be calculated as follows. At 25 °C ... 

Here, x is the coordinate normal to the diaphragm, so that d — q—p. The liquid junction potential A0L is the diffusion potential difference between solutions 2 and 1. The liquid junction potential can be calculated for more complex systems than that leading to Eq. (2.5.31) by several methods. A general calculation of the integral in Eq. (2.5.30) is not possible and thus assumptions must be made for the dependence of the ion concentration on x in the liquid junction. The approximate calculation of L. J. Henderson is... 

So far, a cell containing a single electrolyte solution has been considered (a galvanic cell without transport). When the two electrodes of the cell are immersed into different electrolyte solutions in the same solvent, separated by a liquid junction (see Section 2.5.3), this system is termed a galvanic cell with transport. The relationship for the EMF of this type of a cell is based on a balance of the Galvani potential differences. This approach yields a result similar to that obtained in the calculation of the EMF of a cell without transport, plus the liquid junction potential value A0L. Thus Eq. (3.1.66) assumes the form... 

So by poor experimental design, we have allowed a liquid junction potential to form in our cell. While we have the same emf as in the first cell, in fact the activity of copper ion in this new cell is only 9.5% of the activity calculated for the case where no liquid junction potential was induced. 

An electrode potential Eaq+.aq is measured as 0.670 V. In fact, this value is too high because the value of Eaq+.aq also incorporates a liquid junction potential of 22 mV. Calculate two values of a(Ag ), first by assuming that Eaq+.aq is accurate, and secondly by taking account of E. What is the error in a(Ag ) caused by the liquid junction potential Take E + = 0.799 V at 298 K. 

When considering potentiometric errors, it is necessary to appreciate how a liquid junction potential, Ej, arises, and appreciate how such potentials can lead to significant errors in a calculation. In addition, we saw how the IR drop can affect a potentiometric measurement (and described how to overcome this). Finally, we discussed the ways that potentiometric measurements are prone to errors caused by both current passage through the cell, and by the nature of the mathematical functions with which the Nemst equation is formulated. 

The experimental apparatus consists essentially of a narrow vertical glass tube down the inner surface of which one liquid is made to flow, the other liquid emerges from a fine glass tip in the form of a narrow jet down the axis of the tube. The two solutions are connected with calomel electrodes employing potassium chloride or nitrate as junction liquids. The E.M.F. of the cell is measured by means of a sensitive quadrant electrometer. The greatest source of error in the method is the elimination of or the calculation of the exact values of the liquid-liquid junction potentials in the system. For electrolytes which are not very capillary active, the possible error may amount to as much as fifty per cent, of the observed E.M.F. 

Hence, pH is not identical with — log H+ since the calculation of ycr is somewhat arbitrary. Furthermore, an unknown difference in liquid junction potentials may become important especially if solutions X and S differ in ionic strength and composition. Using a medium of constant ionic strength, however, it is possible to determine the hydrogen ion concentration, [H+], using a glass or hydrogen electrode. Biedermann and Sillen (8) extensively studied the cell ... 

For a uni-univalent electrolyte, the multiplier term in (6.24) cancels out and the liquid junction potential can be calculated from the equivalent ionic conductivities Xi of the two solutions, from the Sargent equation. 

Therefore the fraction of the total cell potential due to the junction potential cannot be unambiguously assigned. However, it is possible to estimate junction potentials indirectly or to make calculations based on assumptions about the geometry and distribution of ions in the region of the junction. For a junction between two dilute solutions of the same univalent electrolyte (concentrations C] and C2), the liquid-junction potential is described by... 

Table 2.1 lists half-reactions for electrodes of the second type and their potential for unit activities. These electrodes have, in the majority of cases, their own electrolyte associated with them. So, to calculate the potential of a cell in relation to the standard hydrogen electrode it is necessary to take the liquid junction potential between the two electrolytes into account (Section 2.10). 

For the purpose of exact calculation of the liquid junction potential according to the last mentioned equation the activity coefficient of the hydrogen or chloride ions would have to be known. As their value is unknown it is assumed that their ratio is equal to the ratio of the mean activity coefficients of hydrochloric acid, or in other words ( +)2/( +)i — (a+)2l(a )v Then the equation (VI-28) will be written in this form ... 

Interface between two liquid solvents — Two liquid solvents can be miscible (e.g., water and ethanol) partially miscible (e.g., water and propylene carbonate), or immiscible (e.g., water and nitrobenzene). Mutual miscibility of the two solvents is connected with the energy of interaction between the solvent molecules, which also determines the width of the phase boundary where the composition varies (Figure) [i]. Molecular dynamic simulation [ii], neutron reflection [iii], vibrational sum frequency spectroscopy [iv], and synchrotron X-ray reflectivity [v] studies have demonstrated that the width of the boundary between two immiscible solvents comprises a contribution from thermally excited capillary waves and intrinsic interfacial structure. Computer calculations and experimental data support the view that the interface between two solvents of very low miscibility is molecularly sharp but with rough protrusions of one solvent into the other (capillary waves), while increasing solvent miscibility leads to the formation of a mixed solvent layer (Figure). In the presence of an electrolyte in both solvent phases, an electrical potential difference can be established at the interface. In the case of two electrolytes with different but constant composition and dissolved in the same solvent, a liquid junction potential is temporarily formed. Equilibrium partition of ions at the - interface between two immiscible electrolyte solutions gives rise to the ion transfer potential, or to the distribution potential, which can be described by the equivalent two-phase Nernst relationship. See also - ion transfer at liquid-liquid interfaces. 

---