Oxidation of Metals

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 241–249 | Cite as

“Logarithmic” kinetics in thin film tarnishing

  • D. J. Young
  • M. J. Dignam
Article
Received:

Abstract

A brief review of oxidation theories indicates that no sound theory of general applicability exists for the direct logarithmic tarnishing kinetics attributed to many metals at low temperatures. Data previously cited in support of two stages of direct logarithmic growth are fitted to other better-founded rate laws. On the basis of this analysis, it is concluded that little, if any, justification exists in support of a two-stage direct logarithmic law. Thus,for example, the data for zinc oxidation can be interpreted in terms of the Mott-Cabrera theory, with the resulting kinetic parameters having values in accord with those estimated from the theory.

Keywords

Oxidation Zinc Physical Chemistry Thin Film Kinetic Parameter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    G. Tamman and W. Koster,Z. Anorg. Chem. 123, 196 (1922).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    O. Kubaschewski and B. E. Hopkins,Oxidation of Metals and Alloys (Butterworths, London, 1967).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    N. F. Mott,Trans. Faraday Soc. 36, 472 (1940).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. T. Fromhold,Phys. Rev. 163, 650 (1967).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. J. Dignam, D. J. Young, and D. G. W. Goad,J. Phys. Chem. Solids (in press).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    U. R. Evans,The Corrosion and Oxidation of Metals (Arnold, London, 1960).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. T. Landsberg,J. Chem. Phys. 23, 1079 (1955).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Hurlen,J. Inst. Metals 89, 128 (1960).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. D. Eley and P. R. Wilkinson,Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A254, 327 (1960).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    F. P. Fehlner and N. F. Mott,Oxid. of Metals 2, 59 (1970).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    T. B. Grimley and B. M. W. Trapnell,Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A234, 405 (1956).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    I. M. Ritchie,Phil. Mag. 19, 421 (1969).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. H. Uhlig,Acta Met. 4, 541 (1956).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. T. Fromhold,Nature 200, 1309 (1963).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. T. Fromhold,J. Electrochem. Soc. 115, 882 (1968).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    I. M. Ritchie,Surface Sci. 23, 443 (1970).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    V. O. Nwoko and H. H. Uhlig,J. Electrochem. Soc. 112, 1181 (1965).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D. J. Young and M. J. Dignam,J. Phys. Chem. Solids (in press).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    N. Cabrera and N. F. Mott,Rept. Progr. Phys. 13, 163 (1948).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    H. H. Uhlig, J. Pickett, and J. MacNairn,Acta Met. 7, 111 (1959).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    B. Lustman and R. Mehl,Trans. AIME 143, 246 (1941).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. W. Swanson and H. H. Uhlig,J. Electrochem. Soc. 118, 1325 (1971).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    H. Engell, K. Hauffe, and B. Illschner,Z. Elektrochem. 58, 478 (1954).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    E. Gulbransen and K. Andrew,J. Electrochem. Soc. 98, 241 (1951).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    W. H. Beyer, ed.,Handbook of Tables for Probability and Statistics (The Chemical Rubber Co., Cleveland, Ohio, 1966), pp. 19, 240-246.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1972

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. J. Young
    • 1
  • M. J. Dignam
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations