1972
DOI: 10.1016/0021-9614(72)90081-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Standard potentials of the cesium amalgam electrode, and thermodynamic functions for dilute cesium amalgams and for aqueous cesium chloride

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

1973
1973
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The cesium amalgam mole fraction in the present work was 0.004551, higher than the composition of the cesium amalgam used by Bent et al (8), Xcs --0.002827. The value of 1.107V obtained in the present work is indeed lower than the value of 1.121V measured by Bent et al (8) for a more dilute amalgam, and agrees reasonably with the calculated value of 1.100V after Mussini, Longhi, and Riva (17).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The cesium amalgam mole fraction in the present work was 0.004551, higher than the composition of the cesium amalgam used by Bent et al (8), Xcs --0.002827. The value of 1.107V obtained in the present work is indeed lower than the value of 1.121V measured by Bent et al (8) for a more dilute amalgam, and agrees reasonably with the calculated value of 1.100V after Mussini, Longhi, and Riva (17).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The results of these tests are shown in Figure 11. All isopiestic data of Bahia et al 13 and Kirgintsev and Luk'yanov 15,16 support well the suggested Hu ¨ckel parameter values, but the isopiestic data of Robinson and Sinclair, 3 19 in CsCl solutions on cell 16 as a function of molality m. The predicted cpd was calculated by using eq 17 where eq 1 with B ) 0.84 (mol • kg -1 ) -1/2 and b 1 ) 0.0341 was used for the activity coefficients and the following values were used for the standard cpds: b, x ) 0.0006650, E o ) 1.98538 V; O, 0.001289, 2.00473; 1, 0.005521, 2.05169; 3, 0.006073, 2.05607; 9, 0.009942, 2.07742; 0, 0.01337, 2.09347. ; and in the isotonic LiCl (x) and CsCl (y) solutions reported 3, by Kirgintsev and Luk'yanov. 16 The vapor pressures have been calculated by eqs 3 and 4 using eq 6 with the suggested parameter values for NaCl, 12 KCl, 12 and LiCl 23 and with B ) 0.84 (mol • kg -1 ) -1/2 , b 1 ) 0.03234, and b 2 ) 0.00057 for CsCl.…”
Section: Determination Of Parameters B and B 1 For Dilute Cscl Soluti...mentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Deviation, e E in eq , between the observed and predicted cell potential difference (cpd) from the data measured by Mussini et al in CsCl solutions on cell 16 as a function of molality m . The predicted cpd was calculated by using eq where eq with B = 0.84 (mol·kg −1 ) −1/2 and b 1 = 0.0341 was used for the activity coefficients and the following values were used for the standard cpds: ●, x = 0.0006650, E o = 1.98538 V; ○, 0.001289, 2.00473; ▼, 0.005521, 2.05169; ▽, 0.006073, 2.05607; ◼, 0.009942, 2.07742; ◻, 0.01337, 2.09347.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 2 more Smart Citations