Interface Between Two Immiscible Liquid Electrolytes: A Review

Vanýsek, Petr; Ramírez, Luis Basáez

doi:10.4067/s0717-97072008000200002

Cited by 74 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 186 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The detected current arises as a result of the applied potential-induced movement of ions across the liquid | liquid interface, in accordance with the ions' Gibbs energy of transfer. It affords a level of selectivity to the detection process, just as the applied potential does at solidliquid interfaces [1][2][3]. Electrochemistry at micro-and nano-scale ITIES creates prospects for improved analytical sensitivity as a result of greater diffusional flux and often smaller iR drop [2,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronoamperometric response at nanoscale liquid–liquid interface arrays

Sairi¹,

Strutwolf²,

Mitchell³

et al. 2013

Electrochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work, potential step chronoamperometry (PSCA) was used to study the behaviour of arrays of nanoscale interfaces between two immiscible electrolyte solutions (nanoITIES). The nanoITIES arrays were formed at nanoporous silicon nitride membranes containing 400 nanopores in a hexagonal close-packed arrangement. Three membrane designs, with nanopore radii of 75, 50 and 17 nm, were studied by ion-transfer of tetrapropylammonium cations across the nanopore array-supported water1,6-dichlorohexane interface. The cell time constants and charging times were determined prior to experimental PSCA. The three membrane designs studied exhibited charging times in the range of 0.08 s to 0.46 s, with the smallest pore configuration (17 nm radius) exhibiting the longest charging time. The experimental steady-state currents were 30-50 % lower than of the calculated inlaid disc model currents, due to diffusion zone overlap at adjacent interfaces. The three 1 ISE member 2 nano-interface arrays studied also showed response times of 6  1 s, being the time required to reach 95 % of the steady-state current.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronoamperometric response at nanoscale liquid–liquid interface arrays

Sairi¹,

Strutwolf²,

Mitchell³

et al. 2013

Electrochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At negative polarization, the transfer takes place with Cl -and BTPPA + from the aqueous and organic phases, respectively. [1][2][3][4][5]50 The presence of the CNTs at the interface increases the current in the voltammetry, as observed in Figure 2. This increase in current could be related to the presence of the Fe species within the CNTs, as no such increase in background current was observed in a previous study with CNTs (single-walled type) adsorbed at the L/L interface.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 70%

Electrodeposition of Prussian Blue/Carbon Nanotube Composites at a Liquid‑Liquid Interface

Husmann

Booth

Zarbin

et al. 2018

J. Braz. Chem. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The iron complex hexacyanoferrate (Fe 4 [Fe(CN) 6 ] 3 ), known as Prussian Blue (PB), was electrodeposited over a free-standing carbon nanotube (CNT) film assembled at the interface between two immiscible liquids, water and 1,2-dichlorobenzene. Polarization of the interface achieved through a fixed potential or under potential variation enabled iron present inside CNTs to generate a stable CNT/PB composite. We report herein on the observation that the deposition of PB is dependent on both the pH and applied potential. It was found that aqueous phases containing K 3 [Fe(CN) 6 ] can decompose under an applied potential, while those containing K 4 [Fe(CN) 6 ] presented more stable behavior making it a suitable precursor for PB synthesis. The electrodeposition and modification of the interface was followed by in situ spectroelectrochemical Raman spectroscopy, which indicated that an increase in signal due to PB formation was acompanied by changes in the CNT bands due to modification of the CNT walls by decoration with PB, forming a composite structure. Keywords: liquid-liquid interface, Prussian Blue, carbon nanotubes, immiscible liquids IntroductionBiphasic liquid/liquid (L/L) systems have been used for a long time, either for the study of interfacial electron and ion transfer reactions or for the synthesis and assembly of micro and nano-sized materials.1,2 The interface between two immiscible liquids provides a defect-free environment suitable for controlled homogeneous particle deposition. Driven by the decrease in the L/L interfacial free energy, particles dispersed or synthesized in a biphasic system spontaneously migrate to the interface formed by the two liquids. [3][4][5] Due to the ease of formation and robust nature of L/L interfaces, they have been utilized in a wide range of different applications. The L/L system can be used simply as a means to assemble previously synthesized materials into organized arrays or thin films, such as carbon nanostructures or metal nanoparticles. 6,7 Alternatively, materials can be both synthesized and assembled by using the L/L interface as the region of contact between reactants located in the different phases. [8][9][10] As an alternative to spontaneous reactions occurring at the point of contact between the two phases, material deposition can also occur by electrochemical polarization of the interface. 11,12 In addition to standard synthetic parameters such as concentration, time or pH, the applied potential and polarization of the interface between the two immiscible electrolyte solutions (ITIES) governs the rate of ion and electron transfer between the phases, allowing significant control over synthetic procedures. 1,2,13,14 By combining these different approaches to utilize the L/L interface, composite structures can be prepared using one material as the support and/or nucleation site for the other. 15,16 Previously, it has been observed that particle or polymer formation was possible, under stirring, on the surface of carbon nanostructures present in a L/L sy...

show abstract

“…The two counter electrodes are platinum flag or mesh electrodes, which can be separated from the solutions by a glass frit, preventing any products of electrochemical reactions that occur at the counter electrodes from contaminating the solutions. [9] Control and measurement is achieved via a four-electrode potentiostat. [10] Nowadays, the major electrochemical instrument companies all supply potentiostats that can be used for these measurements, with the reference and counter electrode terminals and "sense" and "working"…”

Section: Experimental Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electroanalytical Opportunities Derived from Ion Transfer at Interfaces between Immiscible Electrolyte Solutions

Arrigan¹,

Eulate²,

Liu³

2016

Aust. J. Chem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThis review presents an introduction to electrochemistry at interfaces between immiscible electrolyte solutions and surveys recent studies of this form of electrochemistry in electroanalytical strategies. Simple ion and facilitated ion transfers across interfaces varying from millimetre scale to nanometre scales are considered. Target detection strategies for a range of ions, inorganic, organic and biological, including macromolecules, are discussed.

show abstract

Interface Between Two Immiscible Liquid Electrolytes: A Review

Abstract: An overview on electrochemistry on the interfaces between two immiscible electrolyte solutions is given.

Cited by 74 publications

References 186 publications

Chronoamperometric response at nanoscale liquid–liquid interface arrays

Chronoamperometric response at nanoscale liquid–liquid interface arrays

Electrodeposition of Prussian Blue/Carbon Nanotube Composites at a Liquid‑Liquid Interface

Electroanalytical Opportunities Derived from Ion Transfer at Interfaces between Immiscible Electrolyte Solutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About