doi:10.1016/j.ultsonch.2004.06.010 
Copyright © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Characterization of a 20 kHz sonoreactor. Part II: analysis of chemical effects by classical and electrochemical methods
V. Sáeza, A. Frı́as-Ferrera, J. Iniestaa, J. González-Garcı́aa, 
, 
, A. Aldaza and E. Rierab
aGrupo de Electroquı́mica Aplicada y Electrocatálisis, Departamento de Quı́mica Fı́sica. Universidad de Alicante. Ap. Correos 99, 03080 Alicante, Spain
bInstituto de Acústica, CSIC, Serrano 114, 28006 Madrid, Spain
Received 16 February 2004;
revised 23 June 2004;
accepted 23 June 2004.
Available online 12 August 2004.
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must
purchase this article.
Abstract
A new electrochemical redox probe has been investigated in order to characterize the local production of radicals during the cavitation events. The results have been compared with those obtained with 
(electrochemical probe for local mechanical effects) and classical chemical methods such as iodide and Fricke dosimeters (chemical probes for global effects).
Keywords: Sonoreactor; Ultrasonic intensity; Characterization; Electrochemical probe; Chemical dosimeter
Fig. 1. Diagram of experimental set-up: (1) ultrasonic probe, (2) transductor, (3) working electrode, (4) counter electrode, (5) reference electrode/Luggin system, (6) gas passing, (7) electrolyte, (8) cooling jacket, (9) Teflon adapter, (10) O-ring joints.
Fig. 2. Yields (G) of Fe3+ (■) and I2 (•) as a function of the global ultrasonic intensity.
Fig. 3. Cyclic voltammetry for the electrochemical behaviour of 5 × 10−3 mol dm−3 K3Fe(CN)6 in 1 mol dm−3 KOH using a glassy carbon electrode at silent conditions. T = 298 K. Sweep rate: (a) 10 mV s−1, (b) 20 mV s−1, (c) 50 mV s−1, (d) 100 mV s−1, (e) 200 mV s−1.
Fig. 4. Potential step experiments (j vs t) for the reduction of 5 × 10−3 mol dm−3 K3Fe(CN)6 in 1 mol dm−3 KOH at a glassy carbon electrode as a function of the electrode–emitter surface distance: (a) 1 cm, (b) 1.5 cm, (c) 2 cm, (d) 2.5 cm, (e) 3 cm, (f) 3.5 cm, (g) 4 cm. Ef = +130 mV vs SCE. T = 298 K. I = 5.09 W cm−2.
Fig. 5. Typical j vs t curve for the electrodeposition of lead dioxide under a crystallization overpotential.
Fig. 6. j vs t curves for the electrodeposition of lead dioxide as a function of the global ultrasonic intensity. Inlet box shows induction time vs global ultrasonic intensity (values obtained from the numerical simulation of j vs t curves.0.1 mol dm−3 lead (II) + 1 mol dm−3 perchloric acid. T = 298 K, Ef = 1480 mV vs SCE.
Fig. 7. j vs t curves for the electrodeposition of lead dioxide as a function of the electrode–emitter surface distance: (a) 1 cm, (b) 1.5 cm, (c) 2 cm, (d) 2.5 cm, (e) 3 cm, (f) 3.5 cm, (g) 4 cm. Electrolyte 0.1 mol dm−3 lead (II) + 1 mol dm−3 perchloric acid. T = 298 K, I = 5.09 W cm−2. Ef = 1420 mV vs SCE.
Fig. 8. Sherwood number (■) and inverse of the induction time (•) vs distance electrode–emitter surface. Diffusion coefficient for 
ion taken from Ref. [51].
Table 1.
Experimental values for the reversibility test obtained from cyclic voltammograms for the electrochemical behaviour of 
redox couple
Abstract
Purchase PDF (376 K)
E-mail Article
Add to my Quick Links
Cited By in Scopus (4)
Purchase PDF (671 K)
redox agent
