Metal and Electrolyte

Several workers have now presented models of the interface as a whole, treating metal and electrolyte phases simultaneously. In principle, one should treat the entire interface, including species of both metal and electrolyte phases. Treatments attempting to do this [see below, around Eq. (46)] have proved too difficult. Fortunately, it seems96 that the details of the metal s electronic profile do not much affect the distribution of solvent species and vice versa. This allows separate solution of the problems for the two phases, 

The metal-solvent interactions were put into the model of Price and Halley93 in a later paper by Halley and co-workers,97 which also remedied some of the deficiencies of the original model, such as the inability to calculate the slope of a plot of (Cc) 1 versus qM and the dependence of the compact-layer capacitance on crystal face. One can show in general [see Eq. (40)] that 

Here 8p is the difference between the charge density at surface charge qM and the charge density at qM = 0. Both x2 and x depend 

In Ref. 97, the value of x2 is found by minimizing the surface energy of the interface, written as a sum of five contributions  

Solvent and other contributions to the surface energy that are independent of x2 need not be considered, since the surface energy is used only to find x2 by minimization. It is assumed that no change in the electronic structure of the metal-ion cores or in their distribution occurs during charging. 

---

In principle, cathodic protection can be used for a variety of applications where a metal is immersed in an aqueous solution of an electrolyte, which can range from relatively pure water to soils and to dilute solutions of acids. Whether the method is applicable will depend on many factors and, in particular, economics — protection of steel immersed in a highly acid solution is theoretically feasible but too costly to be practicable. It should be emphasised that as the method is electrochemical both the structure to be protected and the anode used for protection must be in both metallic and electrolytic contact. Cathodic protection cannot therefore be applied for controlling atmospheric corrosion, since it is not feasible to immerse an anode in a thin condensed film of moisture or in droplets of rain water. 

Thus the potential difference at the interface between a metal and electrolyte solution is due to both the charges at the interface (electrostatic potential difference) and the surface dipole layers the latter is referred to as the surface or adsorption potential difference. On the basis of the above considerations it might appear that adsorption at a metal surface with an excess charge is solely due to electrostatic interaction with charged species in the solution, i.e. if the metal surface has an excess negative charge the cations... 

When the solution in this redox system is in contact with a nonconsumable metal electrode (e.g., a platinum electrode), the equilibrium set up also implies equal electrochemical potentials, and pp, of the electrons in the metal and electrolyte. 

A lead-acid storage battery is only one type of battery, however. Different batteries use different metals and electrolytes to make them work. For example, alkaline batteries (the ones found in flashlights, toys, and portable electronic devices) contain powdered zinc and manganese dioxide as their electrodes. They use an electrolyte made of an alkaline solution of potassium hydroxide. Most alkaline batteries have a finite amount of chemicals in them. Once the chemicals react with one another, they are used up, and the battery goes dead (is discharged) and cannot be recharged. 

In fact, the orientation of water at the potential of zero charge is expected to depend approximately linearly on the electronegativity of the metal.9 This orientation (see below) may be deduced from analysis of the variation of the potential drop across the interface with surface charge for different metals and electrolytes. Such analysis leads to the establishment of a hydrophilicity scale of the metals ( solvophilicity for nonaqueous solvents) which expresses the relative strengths of metal-solvent interaction, as well as the relative reactivities of the different metals to oxygen.23... 

It may be noted that the statement made above—that the surface potential in the electrolyte phase does not depend on the orientation of the crystal face—is necessarily an assumption, as is the neglect of S s1- It is another example of separation of metal and electrolyte contributions to a property of the interface, which can only be done theoretically. In fact, a recent article29 has discussed the influence of the atomic structure of the metal surface for solid metals on the water dipoles of the compact layer. Different crystal faces can allow different degrees of interpenetration of species of the electrolyte and the metal surface layer. Nonuniformities in the directions parallel to the surface may be reflected in the results of capacitance measurements, as well as optical measurements. 

One can say that the metal in the interface has come a long way in the last ten years, from a featureless conducting medium to a component with its own complicated structure and role. Since separation of properties of the interface into metal and electrolyte contributions cannot be done unambiguously by experiment alone, theoretical calculations on the metal surface have been necessary to establish the importance of the contribution of the metal. It is... 

For the metal in the electrochemical interface, one requires a model for the interaction between metal and electrolyte species. Most important in such a model are the terms which are responsible for establishing the metal-electrolyte distance, so that this distance can be calculated as a function of surface charge density. The most important such term is the repulsive pseudopotential interaction of metal electrons with the cores of solvent species, which affects the distribution of these electrons and how this distribution reacts to charging, as well as the metal-electrolyte distance. Although most calculations have used parameterized simple functional forms for this term, it can now be calculated correctly ab initio. 

What one requires is a self-consistent picture of the interface, including both metal and electrolyte, so that, for a given surface charge, one has distributions of all species of metal and electrolyte phases. Unified theories have proved too difficult but, happily, it seems that some decoupling of the two phases is possible, because the details of the metal-electrolyte interaction are not so important. Thus, one can calculate the structure of each part of the interface in the field of the other, so that the distributions of metal species are appropriate to the field of the electrolyte species, and vice versa. 

For any combination of metal and electrolyte, there is a potential called the potential of zero charge (pzc) where there is no excess charge on the metal. At this potential the nanotubule membranes should show neither cation nor anion permselectivity, and should approach 0 mV. for the tubule-containing membrane does, indeed, go from the ideal cation-... 

RedOx electrode potentials are the result of an exchange of electrons between metal and electrolyte. In Section 5.4 we have shown that the metal/metal-ion electrode potentials are the result of an exchange of metal ions between metal and electrolyte. In the RedOx system the electrode must be made of an inert metal, usually platinum, for which there is no exchange of metal ions between metal and electrolyte. The electrode acts as a source or sink for electrons. The electrolyte in the RedOx system contains two substances electron donors (electron-donating species) and electron acceptors (electron-accepting species). One example of a RedOx system is shown in Figure 5.4. In this case the electron donor is Fe ", the electron acceptor is Fe , the electrode is Pt, and the electrode process is... 

For the purposes of discussion, we distinguish between two types of electric conductance metallic and electrolytic, the first being a stream of electrons, as in a copper wire, the second being a stream of ions, as in the case of a salt solution in water. In this case, positive ions will drift in the direction of the cathode, whereas negative ions will drift in the direction of the anode. 

Helmholtz [71] first described the interfacial behavior of a metal and electrolyte as a capacitor, or so-called electrical double layer, with the excess surface charge on the metallic electrode remaining separated from the ionic counter charge in the electrolyte by the thickness of the solvation shell. Gouy and Chapmen subsequently... 

Thus, any surface geometry or covering which leads to poorer access of oxygen to one part of a metal surface over another will lead to the formation of an oxygen concentration cell and resultant localised corrosion. In such cases, the anodic dissolution occurs as close to the cathodic (aerated) area as possible, especially in poorly conducting media. This is due to the current taking the shortest path, i.e. least resistance in both metal and electrolyte. 

In many cases one layer in a laminate is selectively permeable to some substances, e.g., organic compounds, and impermeable to metals, salts and other electrolytes. A typical example is packaging made of paper or board coated with polyethylene for contact with foods. The polyethylene layer is then designated as a functional barrier for metals and electrolytes. 

As a first approximation one can view metallation and electrolytic reduction as a single class of reactions differing only in the ease with which electrons are transferred to the substrate. Ordinarily mercury metal does not react with alkyl halides because of its high ionization potential of 240 kcal mol as compared with 124,176 and 216 kcal mol for lithium, magnesium and zinc, respectively. However, if one places a potential across mercury then it will readily react with alkyl halides in an electrolytic reaction. 

The multiphysics and multiscale character of the important features of Hall-Heroult cell operation makes difficult laboratory scale experimentation that is relevant to industrial pot operations. For example, cell C E is influenced by the cell-scale flow of the metal and electrolyte, which is determined in turn by the magnetic field which depends on the entire cell current. CE also depends on the finer scale flow due to release of the carbon dioxide bubbles from the anodes. It is generally not possible to examine these two effects simultaneously in the laboratory. Also, the generally hostile environment inside Hall-Heroult cells makes experimentation difficult, and the high cost of modification of full-scale pots further complicates industrial trials. In this environment, numerical or mathematical modeling of pots would be expected to be a useful tool. 

Luigi Galvani (1791) was the first to discover the physiological action of electricity. He demonstrated the existence of bioelectric forces in animal tissue. His experiments led Alessandro Volta to the invention of the first battery, voltaic pile [8]. In 1800, Alessandro Volta described the voltaic pile in a letter to the Royal Society in London [7]. The original voltaic cell used two metal disks as electrodes, namely zinc and silver. Cardboard disks separated the electrodes and seawater was the electrolyte. A current was produced when the silver disk was connected to the zinc disk through an external wire. The voltaic pile established the foundation for the liquid battery type. Many other metals and electrolytes have been tried during the last two centuries [9]. 

Here J (/, t) is the rate of current generation which is either given by the RHS of Eq. (45) or (46), and Cd is the doublelayer capacitance per unit volume of the distributed electrode. In other words, it is the capacity per unit surface area of the contact between the metal and electrolyte... 

The current efficiency in modern cells of aluminum electrolysis may exceed 95%. It is generally accepted that the major part of loss in current efficiency is due to the reaction between dissolved metal and electrolyte. Model studies by 0degard et al. (1988) indicates that sodium dissolves in the electrolyte in the form of free Na, while dissolved Al is predominantly present as the monovalent species ALF. Any electronic conductivity is most likely associated with the Na species, which may form trapped electrons and electrons in the conduction band. Morris (1975) ascribed the loss in current efficiency during Al production to electronic conduction. In a theoretical and experimental study. Dewing and Yoshida (1976) subsequently maintained that the electronic conductivity was too low to account for the loss in current efficiency in industrial aluminum cells. However, the existence of electronic conduction in NaF-AlF3 melts was demonstrated later by Borisoglebskii et al. (1978) also. 

The electrical properties of systems containing charged species are very important in achieving an understanding of how they behave at interfaces. In this chapter, attention is focused on two such systems, namely, metals and electrolyte solutions, that is, the components of electrochemical cells. In the following section, the properties of electrons in metals and the work required to extract an electron are examined in more detail. 

BIO. Buck, R. P., Potential generating processes at inter ces From electrolytes/metal and electrolyte/membrane to electrolyte/semiconductor. In Theory Design, and Biochemical Applications of Solid State Chemical Sensors (P. W. Cheung, D. G. Fleming, with Ko and M. R. Neuman, eds.), pp. 3-39. CRC Press, West Palm Beach, Florida, 1978. 

---