Individual interface differences potential

Despite the fact that Galvani potentials for individual interfaces between phases of different types cannot be determined, their existence and the physical reasons that they develop cannot be doubted. The combined values of Galvani potentials for certain sets of interfaces that can be measured or calculated are very important in electrochemistry (see Section 2.3.2). 

At zero current, when the potential within each conductor is constant, the potential difference between the terminal members of a sequence of conductors joined together as an open circuit is the algebraic sum of aU Galvani potentials at the individual interfaces for example. 

Standard Hydrogen Electrode It is impossible to measure the Galvani potential difference across a single individual interface directly, because an electrolyte s contact to the conductors of an electric measuring device requires a second... 

Nernst s early vievi that the separate terms of his whole-ceJI equations gave the absolute potential difference across each individual interface was later modified by the recognition that the condition of zero interfacial charge is not necessarily the condition of zero potential difference. His eponymous equations for whole cells in any case relate to relative not absolute differences, and remain the crucial cornerstone of equilibrium electrochemistry. 

A galvanic cell s OCV is the algebraic sum of at least three Galvani potentials, two at the interfaces between the electrodes and the electrolyte, and one at the interface between the two electrodes. Since in the cell two arbitrary electrodes are combined, it will be desirable to state the OCV as the difference between two parameters, each of which is characteristic of only one of the electrodes. In the past, the relation % = (pCvi2,E) involving the individual Galvani potentials between the electrodes... 

The above effects are more familiar than direct contributions of the metal s components to the properties of the interface. In this chapter, we are primarily interested in the latter these contribute to M(S). The two quantities M(S) and S(M) (or 8% and S m) are easily distinguished theoretically, as the contributions to the potential difference of polarizable components of the metal and solution phases, but apparently cannot be measured individually without adducing the results of calculations or theoretical arguments. A model for the interface which ignores one of these contributions to A V may, suitably parameterized, account for experimental data, but this does not prove that the neglected contribution is not important in reality. Of course, the tradition has been to neglect the metal s contribution to properties of the interface. Recently, however, it has been possible to use modern theories of the structure of metals and metal surfaces to calculate, or, at least, estimate reliably, xM(S) and 5 (as well as discuss 8 m, which enters some theories of the interface). It is this work, and its implications for our understanding of the electrochemical double layer, that we discuss in this chapter. 

This sharp decline in cell output at subzero temperatures is the combined consequence of the decreased capacity utilization and depressed cell potential at a given drain rate, and the possible causes have been attributed so far, under various conditions, to the retarded ion transport in bulk electrolyte solutions, ° ° - ° ° the increased resistance of the surface films at either the cathode/electrolyte inter-face506,507 Qj. anode/electrolyte interface, the resistance associated with charge-transfer processes at both cathode and anode interfaces, and the retarded diffusion coefficients of lithium ion in lithiated graphite anodes. - The efforts by different research teams have targeted those individual electrolyte-related properties to widen the temperature range of service for lithium ion cells. 

Of course, this argument implies that the M, /S interface is completely polarizable. This is important. The point is that the power supply requires that the whole cell change its potential difference by an amount 8V. Only if one interface is completely nonpolarizable and the other one completely polarizable can the latter wholly accept the changes of potential put out by the source. If both interfaces are partially nonpolarizable, then the potential differences across both of them will change and the experimenter will be at a loss to know the magnitude of the individual changes at each interface. 

Does the impossibility of measurement of a quantity preclude further thought about it Discussion of a concept, even if it cannot be measured, often leads to better understanding of it. With this view, attempts will be made to probe further into the question of the absolute potential difference across an individual metal/solution interface. 

Can the potential difference across an interface be structured, or separated into contributions This potential difference depends on the arrangement of charges, oriented dipoles, etc. Can one speak of separate contributions to the total potential difference from the excess charges on the metal and solution phases, on the one hand, and from the oriented dipoles, on the other Perhaps these individual contributions can be measured or calculated. Thereafter, one may be able to add them together to calculate the elusive metal-solution potential difference. 

Recent theoretical studies indicate that thermal fluctuation of a liquid/ liquid interface plays important roles in chemical/physical properties of the surface [34-39], Thermal fluctuation of a liquid surface is characterized by the wavelength of a capillary wave (A). For a macroscopic flat liquid/liquid interface with the total length of the interface of /, capillary waves with various A < / are allowed, while in the case of a droplet, A should be smaller than 2nr (Figure 1) [40], Therefore, surface phenomena should depend on the droplet size. Besides, a pressure (AP) or chemical potential difference (An) between the droplet and surrounding solution phase increases with decreasing r as predicted by the Young-Laplace equation AP = 2y/r, where y is an interfacial tension [33], These discussions indicate clearly that characteristic behavior of chemical/physical processes in droplet/solution systems is elucidated only by direct measurements of individual droplets. 

---