hide
Free keywords:
-
Abstract:
The authors regret that in the article an error during area normalization of the dissolution during potential step experiments occurred. All measurements and conclusions concerning potentiodynamic protocols are however unaffected by the errors described above and therefore still valid in the original form. The following corrections need to be considered: - The steady state dissolution rate calculated on page 54, end of 3rd paragraph, equals 3.9 pg s−1 cm−2, not “fg s−1 cm−2”. Therefore, in the abstract the steady-state dissolution “ranges around a few picograms per second and square centimeter” instead of femtograms.- The values in Fig. 6 have been corrected and are shown below:Taking the revised values, it can no longer be stated that potential steps yield lower dissolution rates than sweeps in identical potential windows. The dissolution integral observed during the step between 1 and 0 VSHE (7.7 ng cm−2) is in fact higher than the fast cycling experiments from Fig. 4 (3.87 ng cm−2 cycle−1). The initial assumption that both measurement protocols are directly comparable therefore appears unlikely. This originates most likely from the long hold periods at oxidizing and reducing potentials in the potentiostatic series, which are absent in the successive cycling used for potentiodynamic measurements. © 2013 Elsevier B.V.
