2000
DOI: 10.1016/s1388-2481(99)00144-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electrochemical nucleation with diffusion-limited growth. Properties and analysis of transients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
54
0
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 86 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
54
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Although, these kinds of plots have been strongly criticized by Hermann and Tarallo suggesting that such representations must be discouraged; because their utility to get qualitative conclusions is not definitive in all cases. 29 From these plots, it is clear that most of the experimental data fall within the range of validity of the theory proposed by Scharifker et al. 27,28 On the other hand, note that at t/t m < 1 the experimental curve follows the response predicted for a 3D progressive nucleation meanwhile for t/t m > 1 it follows the response predicted for a 3D instantaneous nucleation.…”
supporting
confidence: 62%
“…Although, these kinds of plots have been strongly criticized by Hermann and Tarallo suggesting that such representations must be discouraged; because their utility to get qualitative conclusions is not definitive in all cases. 29 From these plots, it is clear that most of the experimental data fall within the range of validity of the theory proposed by Scharifker et al. 27,28 On the other hand, note that at t/t m < 1 the experimental curve follows the response predicted for a 3D progressive nucleation meanwhile for t/t m > 1 it follows the response predicted for a 3D instantaneous nucleation.…”
supporting
confidence: 62%
“…12,15 The most frequently used model was developed by Scharifker and Hills (S-H) 15 and allows simple and rapid classification of experimental transients into the two limiting nucleation mechanisms-instantaneous and progressive. Even though, there have been several constraints identified with using this semi-empirical model [12][13][14][35][36][37] it is still the most widely used method for analysis of current transients 12,14,21,35,[38][39][40][41][42][43][44] and is considered by many researchers to be the standard nucleation-and-growth model .This model has been found to be appropriate for representing metal deposition in most systems, including molten salts electrolytes 15,44 where the charge transfer step is found to be fast and the rate of growth of nuclei are described by mass-transfer of electrodepositing ions to the growing centers.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here I will mention only the pioneering work of Erdey-Gruz and Volmer [31], who were the first to notice that nuclei of the new phase were formed on some preferred sites on the electrode surface, the work of Fleischmann and Thirsk [32], who considered the case of equally active sites and the works of Kaischev and Mutaftschiev [33], Markov et al [34][35][36] and Fletcher et al [37][38][39][40][41][42], who examined the nucleus formation on active sites with different activities with respect to the process of nucleus formation. Attention should be paid also to the works of Sharifker and Mostany [43], Sluyters-Rehbach et al [44,45], Mirkin and Nilov [46], Heerman and Tarallo [47][48][49][50] and Danilov et al [51][52][53], who contributed essentially to this very important subject, too (see also Ref. [30] and the references cited therein).…”
Section: Non-stationary Nucleation Kineticsmentioning
confidence: 99%