Double-anode anodization of metal Ti in two beakers

Chen, Shuang; Ni, Yilin; Zhang, Jianpeng; Dan, Yuxin; Zhang, Wenchao; Song, Ye; Zhu, Xufei

doi:10.1016/j.elecom.2021.106991

Cited by 37 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Taking the formation mechanism of anodic TiO 2 nanotubes as an example, according to the traditional theory, the field-assisted dissolution reaction (TiO 2 + 6F − + 4H + → [TiF 6 ] 2− + 2H 2 O) involving F − ions has always been considered as the root cause of the formation and growth of nanotubes. 6–10 Schmuki et al 10 believed that there should be a balance between oxide growth and dissolution during anodization. However, these theories cannot clarify the three stages of the current–time curve during anodization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A phosphoric anion layer inhibits electronic current generation and nanotube growth during anodization of titanium

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A phosphoric anion layer inhibits electronic current generation and nanotube growth during anodization of titanium

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, the dissolution rate of fake holes produced by dissolution is very slow. Moreover, according to the cross-section morphology, the number of fake holes is far more than that of real pores, so we believe that it is impossible to form porous oxides by field-assisted dissolution in a short period of anodization, [44][45][46][47] which contradicts the traditional theory. Fig.…”

Section: Ion Totalmentioning

confidence: 75%

The Holes Produced by Field-Assisted Dissolution and the Pores Produced by Oxygen Bubble Mould Effect

Sun³

et al. 2021

J. Electrochem. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although field-assisted dissolution theory is widely accepted for pore formation, many unexplained problems have emerged in recent years. Here, the oxygen bubble mould effect is briefly introduced and the anodizing process of Al in different electrolytes is compared. We found that the field-assisted dissolution can only form fake holes, which were more like shallow pits and not connected to nanotubes. The real pores were formed by the oxygen bubble mould effect, and were more like channels and connected to nanotubes. Additionally, two morphology structures are discussed. Nanotube structure means the cross-sectional morphology is tubular, while the porous structure means the cross-sectional morphology channel-like. Both structures were found in the same sample, which suggests that their formation mechanism was the same; the oxygen bubble mould effect. Depending on this, the electronic current leads to the release of O 2 , which exists in the nanotubes. The nanotube structure splits into porous structure because of its internal pressure. These original findings are important for correct understanding the formation mechanism of porous oxides and nanotubes.

show abstract

“…1d displays three typical stages as reported. 23,30,47 Herein, we give the explanation of three stages based on the field-assisted dissolution theory and the oxygen bubble model, respectively. According to the "top-down digging mode" of the field-assisted dissolution theory, 1 oxide is grown at both the electrolyte/oxide interface and the Ti/oxide interface in the stage (I) in Fig .…”

Section: The Normal Anodization Process Of Ti (Nomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…26,43,44 The ionic current causes the growth of the barrier oxide layer to flow upward around the oxygen bubble mold, creating the nanotube walls. [45][46][47][48][49][50] Garcia-Vergara et al 43 concluded that the viscous flow model and the field-assisted dissolution theories are completely opposite in the way of the pore or nanotube formation. 43 However, there is little direct evidence on whether nanotube embryos are formed by the field-assisted dissolution or by the 'oxygen bubble model'.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%