Mean distance of closest approach of ions: Lithium salts in aqueous solutions

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2008.01.009Get rights and content

Abstract

Numerical values for the mean distance of closest approach of ions, “a”, for lithium salts in aqueous solutions are presented and discussed. These values were obtained from both experimental activity and diffusion coefficients, and estimated by using different theoretical approaches.

Introduction

The importance of lithium salts has long been recognized, and stems from their unique properties that allow them to be used in a wide range of applications. They have been indicated as ideal electrolytes for many electrochemical systems (batteries, fuel cells, double-layer capacitors, actuators, and dye-sensitised solar cells) and are becoming increasingly important in areas such as renewable electricity generation [1], [2], [3], [4]. They are also relevant to other areas, such as pharmacology, where they are used primarily in the treatment of bipolar disorder, but also find applications in reinforcing the efficacy of other antidepressant medication (lithium carbonate or alternatives such as lithium citrate (Li3C6H5O7), lithium sulfate (Li2SO4) and lithium aspartate and orotate) [5], [6], [7], [8]. Other examples of their application can be found in fine chemical and polymer synthesis (LiCl) and also as air purifiers (LiOH) [9], [10], [11].

New demands in science and technology for many of these applications require precise data concerning the fundamental thermodynamic and transport properties of ionic solutions [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. For the explanation of this data, and perhaps more important, to estimate them when no experimental information is available, it is necessary to know parameters such as the “mean distance of closest approach of ions, a” (when this parameter is expressed in angstroms, it is represented by å). While there is a clear need for accurate values of such thermodynamic data on electrolyte solutions, frequently this data is not available from the literature and must be calculated by means of either empirical expressions or theoretical models in which the parameter “a” is involved. This parameter, “a”, depends on the nature and concentration of the electrolyte, and also on the nature and concentration of other species present in the solution which participate in the formation of an ionic atmosphere. While there is no direct method for the measurement of the parameter “a”, it can be estimated by using finite-ion-size equations from measurements of the activity and diffusion coefficients in solutions.

Turq et al. [18], [19] developed a theory which illustrates simultaneously the different transport (e.g., diffusion) and equilibrium properties from very dilute solutions to high concentrations (1–2 mol dm 3) by managing only the diameter of the ions as an adjustable parameter. It is possible to draw several qualitative conclusions from the systematic comparison of the magnitude of the “a” parameter, calculated from those equations with the results of studies of unrelated properties, such as ionic mobilities, and with the results obtained from theoretical approaches. A variety of different techniques ranging from diffraction methods (X-rays, neutrons or electrons) to computer simulations (molecular dynamics or Monte Carlo methods) have been applied to this goal [20], [21]. The available results of the ionic radius, particularly in solutions, up to the end of 1986 have been collected by Marcus in a review paper [21]. However, despite the intense work, the data available on this area are still scarce.

The objective of this paper is to present values for this “a” parameter for lithium salts, estimated from the concurrence of experimental data and theoretical approaches, which will be useful, in our case, for pharmaceutical studies, but will have more general applications for all researchers working with solutions of electrolytes containing this cation.

Section snippets

Estimation of “a” from experimental mean ionic activity coefficients and diffusion coefficients

For well-known reasons, the distance of closest approach, “a”, within the Debye–Hückel theory, has to be regarded as an adjustable parameter in the various semi-empirical equations for activity coefficients [6], [7], [22], [23]. Lobo [22] has estimated this parameter for a large number of electrolytes in aqueous solutions using data from [15] and the equation:lny±=A|z1z2I|1+BaI+bIwhere a and b are considered to be adjustable constants, z1 and z2 are the algebraic valences of a cation and of an

Estimations of a values from Kielland data

From the ionic sizes reported by Kielland [20], values of a were estimated as equal to the mean value of the effective radii of the hydrated ions that forms the electrolyte. These a values are shown in the 4th column in Table 1. The diameters of inorganic ions, hydrated to different degrees, were calculated by using two different methods: from the crystal radius and deformability, using Bonino's equation for the cations [20], and from ionic mobilities [20].

Estimation of a values from Marcus data

Using the Marcus data [21] two

Results and discussion

Table 1 summarizes the a values found for 40 lithium salts in aqueous solution. For some of them, various values for this parameter are presented which have been estimated by using different experimental techniques and/or theoretical approaches here considered. This table shows some similarities to the results obtained for sodium salts [46]. That is, the ab initio values and the values calculated from MM2-0 and Marcus data (a = R1 + R2) are similar, whereas those found from MM2-1 and the other

Conclusions

It is not possible to accurately know the mean distance of closest approach of ions, a, in an electrolyte solution, however desirable that would be. However, we present here several estimations of a using different methods, which we believe will provide the researcher who needs to use this parameter an idea of the possible range of values. All of these are reasonable compromises to provide an appropriate value for this a parameter for the particular problem under study. By taking the

Acknowledgements

Financial support from FCT, FEDER, POCTI (QUI/39593/2001), POCI/AMB/55281/2004 is gratefully acknowledged.

References (46)

  • R.E. Frost et al.

    Brain Res. Bull.

    (1983)
  • B.J. Pleuvry

    Anaesth. Intensive Care Med.

    (2004)
  • Y.G. Andreev et al.

    Electrochim. Acta

    (2000)
  • G. Costa et al.

    Polymer

    (1979)
  • J.-F. Dufrêche et al.

    J. Mol. Liq.

    (2005)
  • A.C.F. Ribeiro et al.

    J. Mol. Liq.

    (2001)
  • V.M.M. Lobo et al.

    Ber. Bunsenges. Phys. Chem.

    (1994)
  • A. Becke

    Phys. Rev.

    (1988)
    A. Becke

    J. Chem. Phys.

    (1993)
  • A.C.F. Ribeiro et al.

    J. Mol. Liq.

    (2006)
  • R. Kawano et al.

    Kobunshi Ronbunshu

    (2006)
  • A. Fernicola et al.

    Ionics

    (2006)
  • S. Chedarampet, Karthikeyan, M. Thelakkat, Inorg. Chim. Acta, In...
  • P. Butler, C. Wagner, R. Guidotti, I. Francis, J. Power Sources 136 (2004)...
  • F. Benedetti et al.

    J. Clin. Psychiatry

    (2005)
  • A. Serretti et al.

    Pharmacogenetics and Genomics

    (2005)
  • M.M. Iovleva1

    Fibre Chem.

    (2001)
  • R.A. Robinson et al.

    Electrolyte Solutions

    (1959)
  • H.S. Harned et al.

    The Physical Chemistry of Electrolytic Solutions

    (1964)
  • A.L. Horvath

    Handbook of Aqueous Electrolyte Solutions. Physical Properties. Estimation and Correlation Methods

    (1985)
  • V.M.M. Lobo

    Handbook of Electrolyte Solutions

    (1990)
  • L. Onsager et al.

    J. Phys. Chem.

    (1932)
  • J.O'M. Bockris et al.

    Modern Electrochemistry, Vol. 1

    (1970)
  • J.-F. Dufrêche et al.

    J. Chem. Phys.

    (2002)
  • Cited by (0)

    1

    Tel.: +351 239 854460; fax: +351 239 827703.

    View full text