Chemistry How does this example of electroplating tungsten onto base metal work?

AI Thread Summary
Electroplating tungsten involves an electrochemical cell where tungsten ions in solution are reduced at the cathode, typically a base metal. The process requires approximately two electrons per tungsten atom, leading to an oxidation number of two. The current is supplied from an external voltage source, usually a battery, creating an electric field that drives the reduction of tungsten ions. A closed circuit is formed with wires connecting the anode and cathode, while the solution completes the circuit. Understanding the setup clarifies the role of emf and the flow of current in electroplating.
zenterix
Messages
774
Reaction score
84
Homework Statement
A jeweler is investigating a novel method for electroplating tungsten onto base metal.

The jeweler passes a 30A current through a solution for 1 hour and 100g of tungsten is deposited on the ring.
Relevant Equations
What is the oxidation number of tungsten in the solution.
From the molar mass of tungsten of 183.84 g/mol, we know that ##100/183.84\approx 0.55## mol was deposited.

We also know how many mols of electrons passed through the solution in an hour.

This comes out to about 1.12 mol of electrons.

So, at a very superficial level of understanding, I concluded that you need about two electrons per atom of tungsten.

The answer to the problem is that the oxidation number is two.

I'd like to understand this problem a bit better.

To electroplate tungsten onto a base metal, it seems we could have an electrochemical cell where the cathode is a base metal plus tungsten ions in solution.

This doesn't seem to be what is happening in the problem however.

What does it mean that the jeweler passes current through a solution in this example?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The jeweler is simply passing a current from an anode (probably something rather inert) to the cathode (the ring) through some solution (something novel containing tungsten ions) and tungsten ions in solution are being reduced at the cathode (being driven by the electrical field to the cathode).

Here is a real life patent from the 50's for tungsten plating: old patent
 
This is just Faradays law of electrolysis at its simplest, don't overdo.

And yes, there is a cell present, not sure why you think otherwise. Before the electrodeposition starts there is no W on the surface and you can argue initially there is no typical Me/Men+ cell, but simple models don't work at such border cases. The only thing that is not simple to determine using basic cell model is the initial electrodeposition potential, reduction as the process of adding electrons works perfectly OK.
 
I've never heard of Faraday's law of electrolysis.
QuarkyMeson said:
The jeweler is simply passing a current from an anode (probably something rather inert) to the cathode (the ring) through some solution (something novel containing tungsten ions) and tungsten ions in solution are being reduced at the cathode (being driven by the electrical field to the cathode).

Here is a real life patent from the 50's for tungsten plating: old patent
So, where does the electric field generating the current come from?

In other words, where does the emf come from?

In a simple electrochemical cell, we have a closed circuit formed by a wire connecting the electrodes and a salt bridge connnecting the solutions. The emf is generated by chemical reactions.

Please realize that though this may be familiar to you it is not to me.

You say a current is passed from an anode to a cathode through a solution. Is there a connecting wire in this setup you speak of?
 
The emf comes from either an external current or voltage source, almost always a voltage source, i.e. a battery. There are wires connecting the external power source, with the positive terminal connected to the anode and the return connected to the cathode via wire. The solution itself then completes the circuit.

Here.
 
Google for the difference between electrolytic and galvanic cells.
 
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost and QuarkyMeson
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top