A new procedure for the derivation of the equation of state in models of adsorption from solution is developed. Based on thermodynamics a simple relation between the surface pressure and the chemical potential of one reference solvent state is established, making the calculation of the state equatio
Comments on a paper by P. Nikitas: “on the derivation of the state equation in models of adsorption from solution” and some nuances of adsorption modelling
✍ Scribed by Marian Karolczak
- Publisher
- Elsevier Science
- Year
- 1989
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 716 KB
- Volume
- 34
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0013-4686
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Abstrad-It has been shown that the equation of state for adsorption from solution presented by Nikitas [Electrochim. Acto 32, 1279 (1987)] has, in fact, been derived before in the literature [Karolnak and Mohilner, J. phys. Chem. 86, 2840 (1982)]. Some inconsistencies and pitfalls in the Nikitas derivation are indicated. The nuance8 in the adsorption modelling are also discussed. Particularly, it has been shown that the postulate of non-compressibility is inherent in the derivation of surface equation of state. The role and significance of two additional basic postulates: the surface displacement reaction and the constant thickness of the interfacial layer (including the concept of monolayer adsorption) have been treated as well. The derivation of the general surface equation of state has been presented. I have recently become aware of the publication[ 1] by P. Nikitas. This publication, especially in the part entitled, "Thermodynamic Equations", contains several highly misleading references and statements and at least one important error. First, the author arbitrarily distinguishes some chemical potential ,u (cf: definition of this quantity in the nomenclature); he later concludes that ". . . cc, is not a surface chemical potential, but only the term which' expresses the concentration dependence of the chemical potential of component i." Next he writes two equations [Equations (4) and (S)]: p,, -rp, = 1: -r&, Equation (4) of [l] x"" dp,, + (1 -~5) dir, = 0, Equation (5) of Cl] and claims that 'I. . . equation (5) is valid in BDM and
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES
used to derive a partial preference ordering. For two recent methods see Salo and HaÈ maÈ laÈ inen (1992, 1995) and for an overview see Weber (1987). From empirical research we know that subjects are prone to biases. In addition, as pointed out by the authors, verbal expressions used in the AHP migh