A comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques

Simulated voltammograms obtained by employing Butler-Volmer (BV) and Marcus-Hush (MH) models to describe the electrode kinetics are compared for commonly used potential pulse techniques: chronoamperometry, Normal Pulse Voltammetry, Differential Multi Pulse Voltammetry, Square Wave Voltammetry and Re...

Description complète

Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs principaux: Laborda, E, Henstridge, M, Molina, A, Martinez-Ortiz, F, Compton, R
Format: Journal article
Langue:English
Publié: 2011
_version_ 1826281410697101312
author Laborda, E
Henstridge, M
Molina, A
Martinez-Ortiz, F
Compton, R
author_facet Laborda, E
Henstridge, M
Molina, A
Martinez-Ortiz, F
Compton, R
author_sort Laborda, E
collection OXFORD
description Simulated voltammograms obtained by employing Butler-Volmer (BV) and Marcus-Hush (MH) models to describe the electrode kinetics are compared for commonly used potential pulse techniques: chronoamperometry, Normal Pulse Voltammetry, Differential Multi Pulse Voltammetry, Square Wave Voltammetry and Reverse Pulse Voltammetry. A comparison between both approaches is made as a function of the heterogeneous rate constant, the electrode size, the applied potential and the electrochemical method, establishing the conditions in which possible differences might be observed. The effect of these differences in the extraction of kinetic parameters, diffusion coefficients and electrode radii are examined, and criteria are given to detect possible deviations of the experimental system from Butler-Volmer kinetics from the behaviour of the chronoamperometric limiting current. The Butler-Volmer model predicts the appearance of an anodic peak in Reverse Pulse Voltammetry for irreversible processes and a peak split of differential pulse voltammograms for quasireversible processes with a value of the transfer coefficient very different from 0.5 (smaller than 0.3 for a reduction process). These striking phenomena are studied by using the Marcus-Hush approach, which also predicts the anodic peak for slow electrode reactions in Reverse Pulse Voltammetry but not the split of the curve in differential pulse techniques. © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T00:28:23Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:7eec03a5-c9e4-436b-b687-3b0af30f44d6
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T00:28:23Z
publishDate 2011
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:7eec03a5-c9e4-436b-b687-3b0af30f44d62022-03-26T21:13:22ZA comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniquesJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:7eec03a5-c9e4-436b-b687-3b0af30f44d6EnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2011Laborda, EHenstridge, MMolina, AMartinez-Ortiz, FCompton, RSimulated voltammograms obtained by employing Butler-Volmer (BV) and Marcus-Hush (MH) models to describe the electrode kinetics are compared for commonly used potential pulse techniques: chronoamperometry, Normal Pulse Voltammetry, Differential Multi Pulse Voltammetry, Square Wave Voltammetry and Reverse Pulse Voltammetry. A comparison between both approaches is made as a function of the heterogeneous rate constant, the electrode size, the applied potential and the electrochemical method, establishing the conditions in which possible differences might be observed. The effect of these differences in the extraction of kinetic parameters, diffusion coefficients and electrode radii are examined, and criteria are given to detect possible deviations of the experimental system from Butler-Volmer kinetics from the behaviour of the chronoamperometric limiting current. The Butler-Volmer model predicts the appearance of an anodic peak in Reverse Pulse Voltammetry for irreversible processes and a peak split of differential pulse voltammograms for quasireversible processes with a value of the transfer coefficient very different from 0.5 (smaller than 0.3 for a reduction process). These striking phenomena are studied by using the Marcus-Hush approach, which also predicts the anodic peak for slow electrode reactions in Reverse Pulse Voltammetry but not the split of the curve in differential pulse techniques. © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
spellingShingle Laborda, E
Henstridge, M
Molina, A
Martinez-Ortiz, F
Compton, R
A comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques
title A comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques
title_full A comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques
title_fullStr A comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques
title_short A comparison of Marcus-Hush vs. Butler-Volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques
title_sort comparison of marcus hush vs butler volmer electrode kinetics using potential pulse voltammetric techniques
work_keys_str_mv AT labordae acomparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT henstridgem acomparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT molinaa acomparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT martinezortizf acomparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT comptonr acomparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT labordae comparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT henstridgem comparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT molinaa comparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT martinezortizf comparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques
AT comptonr comparisonofmarcushushvsbutlervolmerelectrodekineticsusingpotentialpulsevoltammetrictechniques