- #1
Crispin
- 8
- 0
Hi All,
I am currently studying a MSc from UMIST in materials & corrosion science. I'm doing this via distance-learning, so kind of "self-tought", with some tutor support via e-mail.
I picked physics as my science subject in school, so have little, if no chemistry background, and certainly have not studied in the area of science for a loooong time, (I'm now 35, & have a full-time job as a mechanical integrity engineer for a petro-chemical company).
I am going to pop in & out of this forum with some of the more difficult concepts/reading material if that's OK, and hopefully I can learn from you guys, and equally, if there are any threads that I can add some value to, I will certainly do so as well.
I joined the site a while ago, and have just posted a few threads in this time, but as using the site goes, I am a relative newbie.
OK then, here goes with a question;
Throughout the recent material we have been studying the effects of electrode behaviour when cathodic & anodic overpotentials are applied. An extract from a reference book;
"The magnitude of polarisation is usually measured in terms of overpotential n, which is a measure of polarisation with respect to the equilibrium potential Eo of an electrode. This polarisation is said to be either anodic, when the anodic processes on the electrode are accelerated by changing the specimen potential in the positive (noble) direction, or cathodic, when the cathodic processes are accelerated by moving the potential in the negative (active) direction".
Also, in some recent material I have read, relating to a time record from an electrochemical noise measurement, showing positive spikes of potential 50mV above the average potential of +200mV (referenced against SCE).
"if the potential is going more positive, it implies a burst of cathodic activity, not a pitting event", and also, "The potential certainly suggests that the steel is passive, but the spikes are positive-going, which is not consistent with an anodic event(which would make the potential go negative by virtue of it's effect on the cathodic reaction on the passive surface"
Are these not contradictory?, or is it that because in the first instance it talks of an applied potential shift affecting the polorisation, where as in the second, it is the shift that the reaction causes, so the two are opposite to each other?
Anybody able to explain a little?
Thank you
Crispin
I am currently studying a MSc from UMIST in materials & corrosion science. I'm doing this via distance-learning, so kind of "self-tought", with some tutor support via e-mail.
I picked physics as my science subject in school, so have little, if no chemistry background, and certainly have not studied in the area of science for a loooong time, (I'm now 35, & have a full-time job as a mechanical integrity engineer for a petro-chemical company).
I am going to pop in & out of this forum with some of the more difficult concepts/reading material if that's OK, and hopefully I can learn from you guys, and equally, if there are any threads that I can add some value to, I will certainly do so as well.
I joined the site a while ago, and have just posted a few threads in this time, but as using the site goes, I am a relative newbie.
OK then, here goes with a question;
Throughout the recent material we have been studying the effects of electrode behaviour when cathodic & anodic overpotentials are applied. An extract from a reference book;
"The magnitude of polarisation is usually measured in terms of overpotential n, which is a measure of polarisation with respect to the equilibrium potential Eo of an electrode. This polarisation is said to be either anodic, when the anodic processes on the electrode are accelerated by changing the specimen potential in the positive (noble) direction, or cathodic, when the cathodic processes are accelerated by moving the potential in the negative (active) direction".
Also, in some recent material I have read, relating to a time record from an electrochemical noise measurement, showing positive spikes of potential 50mV above the average potential of +200mV (referenced against SCE).
"if the potential is going more positive, it implies a burst of cathodic activity, not a pitting event", and also, "The potential certainly suggests that the steel is passive, but the spikes are positive-going, which is not consistent with an anodic event(which would make the potential go negative by virtue of it's effect on the cathodic reaction on the passive surface"
Are these not contradictory?, or is it that because in the first instance it talks of an applied potential shift affecting the polorisation, where as in the second, it is the shift that the reaction causes, so the two are opposite to each other?
Anybody able to explain a little?
Thank you
Crispin
Last edited: