SEACcommunications
The Society for Electroanalytical
Chemistry - 111 Loren Place, West Lafayette, IN 47906
Available on the WWW at http://seac.tufts.edu
President’s Message
The Reviewer’s Dilemma
I am willing
to bet that you have had more than a few reviews that would have been funny
had the paper/proposal not been yours.I am also sure that you have never
written a bad review.So where do these clever editors come up with these
reviewers?I certainly don't know, but a recent review that I received,
which contained abundant evidence of the writer's poor training, has prompted
some thinking about the review process.(What has this to do with electrochemistry?See
the bottom of this column for one comment that prompted this column.)
Let's
do the numbers … Start with the facts. You should expect to review
2-3 times as many papers as you submit and 5-6 times as many proposals
as you submit. There is no way around it.
Managing
reviews¼
A few years ago I thought that I was being abused.I reviewed 3 proposals
and 8 papers in a period of a couple of months, and I had a proposal deadline
looming.I asked a secretary to send a simple two-line letter asking for
a 3-month cease fire to all of the editors and program directors who had
been providing me with free entertainment over the previous couple of months.It
worked!Each and every letter recipient respected my wishes, and several
phoned me after 4 or 5 months asking if I was ready to begin reviewing
again.Clearly the editorial offices are well-organized and have a way to
keep track of your availability.
Managing
reviews, Part B … I oscillate between two modes:"Do it now"
and "pile 'em up to take on the next trip."I gotta tell ya—the
first one is the best one, for papers anyway.You really ought to be able
to review a paper in a very brief time.Here's how you do it.Put it on your
calendar, like an appointment.This is not the same as putting it on your
list, mind you.If you create a place for it in your week, it will happen.By
the way, this works well for any project—put
a defined piece of work on your calendar just like an appointment.The other
mode—the travel mode—could
be OK if you travel frequently enough.Do let your editor know if you plan
to review the paper on your schedule, not the editor's.
A little
help¼
Did you ever get a review that was more about spelling and punctuation
and experimental details than anything else?It's a 50-50 bet that a graduate
student wrote that review.I like to have students review papers (never
proposals of others; however, I do give them mine at many stages) but they
tend to avoid the big picture questions and focus on the minutiae.If you
ask students to review papers, work with them.
When you
submit¼
What can you do to improve your odds at getting a fair and rapid review?The
most important thing is to write the introduction in a way that focuses
the reader's attention on the single issue that you addressed in the research.Paraphrase
that in the cover letter to the editor.Finally, give the editor half a
dozen, not two, names of potential reviewers.Give addresses, at least for
industrial or government scientists who are not listed conveniently in
the ACS Graduate Directory or on the web.
So what has
this to do with the Editor's stable of less-than-helpful reviewers?I think
many reviews come from good people, but the reviews are less than adequate
because the reviewers are not managing their reviewing chores well, or
they are only tangentially interested in the work that they are reviewing.
Solutions
… Control your reviewing chores.Make a conscious decision to avoid reviewing
for some period of time, and tell program directors and editors about this
decision via a letter, phone call, or email.Then, when you are in the reviewing
mode, you will be mentally prepared for it.When you get a paper—put
it on your schedule as an appointment.When you get a proposal put it on
your schedule as a half-day for reading and pondering, and an hour for
writing and editing the review.If you direct reviews to students, work
with them.
When writing
papers … Be clear about your hypothesis and experimental tests of it.That
way the editor and the reviewers know what you are up to, and will be compelled
to comment on substantive and relevant issues, rather than commenting on
inconsequential or tangential issues, or worse, requesting that you do
a bunch of additional experiments.
So, ultimately,
if we all do our jobs well, quantitatively and qualitatively, then editors
will not have to stretch to seek out reviewers for our papers.The result
will be a better system for all of us.
Now, the reviewer's
comment that prompted this thinking:We had used ferrocene in an acetonitrile-based
electrolyte and ferrocene carboxylic acid in an aqueous/organic electrolyte
to calibrate an electrochemical system (n = 1)."Ferrocene and ferrocene
carboxylic acid are not very stable.Are they very reliable standards for
calibration of hydrodynamic voltammetry and HPLC detection?"
Steve
Weber
____________________________________
Editorial
It has been
a busy Spring (so busy that I am a member of Steve’s category of reviewers
who now lives in danger of death by collapsing piles of papers and proposals
that are long-past needing a review … and remember, Steve:we in industry
and government aren’t writing proposals that y’all in academia need review
… that means the many proposals we review in a given year are our gift
to you, yours, and the system ...
Some of
you have been keeping track of why it has been such of a busy Spring for
me.
For
those of you have not (and give a hoot), feel free to check out my guest
editorial in the 13 March 2000 issue of C&EN in which I discuss
why it may be time
to withhold Federal dollars from (in other words, apply Title IX to) universities
that cannot create a departmental environment that women chemists are willing
to call home.Be sure to check out the three letters in response to my editorial,
which were published in the 8 May issue of C&EN, including two
from SEAC stalwarts:Pete Kissinger (Purdue) and Alex Scheeline
(University of Illinois).And if you are pathologically interested, the
slides that I used in my talk on 3 May at the
National Academy of Sciences (as part of a Chemical Sciences Roundtable
Workshop on Women in the Chemical Workforce, 3-4 May 2000) can be read
by a direct link (Why Title IX) on Dick Crooks’ website:
www.chem.tamu.edu/rgroup/crooks
or
one can go directly to:
http://www.chem.tamu.edu/rgroup/crooks/links/
Title_9/Title9.html
Tusen
takk to Dick!
One
of the pleasant pieces of fallout from my wee editorial Molotov cocktail
is the article published in this issue, which was sent in, post-editorial,
by Anna Farrenkopf of the Oregon Graduate Institute.Anna, our electrochemist
of diagenesis fame [SEAC Communications 1997, 13(3)]
describes her electroanalytical work using microelectrodes in a challenging
electrochemical environment (Columbia River sediment!) as well as her equally
important work to interest young girls in science through OGI’s AWSEM program
(Advocates for Women in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics)—love that
acronym, Anna!!
In
this issue we also have a review by David Blauch of web-available
software that simulates voltammetric data, including reaction mechanisms,
plus a new cartoon from Daren Caruana, SEAC’s cartoonist of all
things electrochemical.
And
most importantly, this issue touts SEAC’s latest award winners:Dick
Buck—the 2001 Charles N. Reilley
Awardee—and Eric Bakker—SEAC’s Young Investigator!Their research
biographies follow immediately.My personal and our Society’s warmest electronic
(and ionic!) congratulations to them both.
May your summer be productive!
Debra
Rolison
_______________________________________________________________________________
All
Hail Dick Buck—the 2001 Charles N. Reilley Awardee—and
Eric
Bakker—SEAC’s Young Investigator!
Congratulations
to Professor Richard
P. Buck,
recipient of SEAC’s 2001 Reilley Award. He will receive the
award at Pittcon® 2001
in New Orleans next March. Buck recently retired from the faculty at the
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, after an illustrious industrial
and academic career that spanned nearly 50 years. A native of Los Angeles,
Dick Buck stayed close to home to receive his B.S. and M.S. degrees in
Chemistry from the California Institute of Technology in 1950 and 1951,
respectively. He then traveled east and earned his Ph.D. in 1954 from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he worked with David
N. Hume.
Following
his graduate work, Buck carried out fundamental research on fuel cells
and other electrochemical systems at the California Research Corporation.
He later moved to Bell & Howell, and then Beckmann Instruments. His
experiences at Beckmann in the early days of electrochemical sensors and
membrane electrodes helped pave the way for him to become the preeminent
academic researcher in this field once he joined the faculty at Chapel
Hill in 1967.
Buck
made enormous contributions to the fields of electroanalytical chemistry
and fundamental electrochemistry during his many years as an active researcher.
Indeed he is the author/coauthor on more than 240 original research papers,
dating back to his earliest work on the first constant-current dual intermediate
titrimetric scheme that was published in Analytical Chemistry in1952.
In the ‘60s and ‘70s he focused his efforts on the theory of interfacial
potential development and selectivity of solid-state and glass membrane
electrodes, including very tedious calculations of the potential profiles
that exist at electrode/membrane interfaces (using numerical solutions
of the Nernst-Planck-Poisson equation). He was one of the very first to
apply impedance methods to delineate the charge-transfer kinetics at the
interfaces and within the bulk of membrane electrodes, including the development
of improved instrumentation to carry out such impedance measurements.
As
newer organic liquid- and polymer-membrane-based ion-selective electrodes
began to emerge in the 1970s, Buck turned his attention to understanding
the ion permselectivity of such membranes, including an in-depth effort
to define the role of endogenous and exogenous lipophilic counterion sites
in preventing interfacial Donnan failure at higher concentrations of analyte
ions.He later went on to pioneer the development of novel microfabricated
ion and biosensor arrays based on flexible Kapton substrates, and further
demonstrated that such devices can be implanted within living heart muscle
to provide the first real time measurements of key ions (H+,
K+, etc.) and metabolites (e.g., lactate) in such tissue.
Dick
Buck’s research contributions go beyond the classical electrochemistry
boundaries.Indeed, several of his early academic papers dealt with spark
sources for mass spectrometry, spectral deconvolution methods, Raman spectroscopy
of adsorbates on electrode surfaces, etc.As one nominating letter writer
put it, “these (other) contributions clearly illustrate the great breadth
of his knowledge and interests … and the high scholarly quality of his
work (electroanalytical and other) over an extended time period makes him
especially worthy of receiving SEAC’s highest honor.”
Congratulations
to Dick Buck on this very well deserved award—we look forward to celebrating
with him next March in New Orleans!
Eric
Bakker, Auburn University, is
the 2001 Young Investigator of SEAC.Eric, a native of The Netherlands,
attended university at ETH in Zurich, Switzerland, and received his Dipl.
Chem. in 1989 and Dr. Sc. Nat. in 1993, working with the late Wilhelm
Simon.He then joined the research group of Professor Mark Meyerhoff,
as a postdoctoral fellow, at the University of Michigan from 1993 to 1995,
where he developed models for anion sensors that have exerted a major influence
on current research in this area.He developed a model/mechanism that thoroughly
explains the response of certain polymeric membranes to macromolecular
polyanionic species.A major contribution was his development of a more
practical and self-consistent model for mathematically expressing, the
selectivity of ion-selective polymeric membrane electrodes.While at Michigan,
he broadened his horizons by working with Professor Raoul Kopleman
in ultramicro-optical sensors, and introducing fluorescent bulk optodes.
Bakker
joined the faculty at Auburn University as Assistant Professor in 1995
and was promoted after just three years to Associate Professor.He has made
numerous seminal contributions to our understanding and development of
chemical sensors.One nominator states:“He has single handedly changed the
way we think of, design, and use ion-selective electrodes in two important
areas:assessment of the true selectivity of an electrode, and the design
and measurement technique to lower the limits of detection by orders of
magnitude over what was possible before.”He has over fifty publications
in the last 6 years.Among more than 20 papers on the theory of ionophore-based
ion-selective electrochemical/optical sensors, perhaps his most innovative
work relates to the determination of unbiased selectivity coefficients
for such devices.Indeed, he has shown the long-used empirical Nicoslky-Eisenman
relationship to be incorrect in certain cases and replaced it by an exact
equation, and he showed that conventional methods for determining selectivity
coefficients are biased by the presence of primary analyte ion within the
polymeric membrane phase of the sensor.At the same time, his discovery
that primary and counterion diffusion through the membrane from the internal
filling solution actually controls the detection limit led to a host of
reports, in collaboration with Erno Pretsch and coworkers at ETH-Zurich,
for methods to greatly lower the limit of detection for such sensors merely
by creating a gradient of primary ion-ionophore complexes through the membrane.This
latter work is truly revolutionary.
His
more recent work has included various other important contributions in
the field of sensors, such as reversible heparin sensors, improved biocompatibility
of ion-selective electrodes, new kinds of reference electrodes, sensor
membranes with acid release, and pioneering work in the new field of voltammetric
transduction of ion sensing with polymeric membranes.
Eric
Bakker has gained the recognition and respect of leaders in the field.One
says:“I believe he is currently the preeminent person in the world working
on the fundamentals of ion sensor response characteristics and mechanisms.”Another
says:“He is the bright spot among the youngest group of the electrochemical
sensor people specializing in membrane and polymer electrolyte chemistry.”
One states:“With his broad fundamental knowledge, he has become, within
a very short time, one of the leading scientists in the field of chemical
sensors, and his quiet and friendly character and complete integrity have
always been appreciated by his colleagues.”And another says:“In my view,
Eric Bakker is one of the up-and-coming young analytical chemists in the
U.S., and one of the top researchers and leaders in the world in the area
of sensors…”
—Remember—We
are back at Party-Central—New Orleans—for Pittcon®
2001 (5-8 March 2001)—Be There!(Note:we had to run Dick’s photo in B&W
because he is so colorful!!)For more on Dick, check out: http://www.chem.unc.edu/faculty/rpb/cfrpb01.html;
for Eric:http://www.auburn.edu/~bakkeer
…
Submission
of Award Nominations
SEAC
established and administers the Charles N. Reilley Memorial Award and the
SEAC Young Investigator Award.Sponsored by Bioanalytical Systems, Inc.,
the Reilley Award recognizes an active researcher who has made a major
contribution to the theory, instrumentation, or applications of electroanalysis.The
Young Investigator Award recognizes accomplishments by a researcher who
is within the first seven years of their career.This award is sponsored
by Ensman Instrumentation.In conjunction with the presentation of these
awards, SEAC arranges an Award Symposium and an informal reception in honor
of the Awardees at the Pittsburgh Conference.In this way, SEAC serves as
the focal point for analytical chemists who wish to exchange ideas about
electroanalytical chemistry at the conference.
Charles
N. Reilley Award
Nominations
for the Reilley Award should include a letter of nomination describing
the individual's significant contributions to electroanalytical chemistry,
at least two seconding letters of support, and a curriculum vitae for the
individual.All nomination materials will be retained by SEAC.Once nominated,
any individual will be considered for three years, but submission of any
additional supporting information or a renomination is welcome.The decision
for the 2002 Reilley Award will be based upon the material that is available
to the Award Committee by 1 March 2001.
Young
Investigator Award
Nominees
for the SEAC Young Investigator Award, sponsored by Cypress Systems, must
be within seven years of obtaining their Ph.D. or other terminal degree
at the time of nomination.Candidates may be nominated by any member of
SEAC.Nominations should include a letter describing the individual's promise
in the area of electroanalytical chemistry, at least one seconding letter
of support, and a curriculum vitae for the individual.All nomination materials
will be retained by SEAC. Once nominated, any individual will be considered
for this award for three years, but the submission of any additional supporting
information or a renomination is welcome.The decision for the 2002 Award
will be based upon the material that is available to the Award Committee
on the 1st of March 2001.
Graduate
Student Travel Award
The
SEAC Graduate Student Travel Grant, sponsored by PerkinElmer Instruments,
is awarded to promising graduate students to offset the cost of travel
to the Pittsburgh Conference to deliver an oral presentation in a Conference
symposium.The presentation should be on a topic related to their Dissertation
or Thesis, and in some area or application of electroanalytical chemistry.
Because
the costs in various venues of the Conference may vary, the amount of the
award will be determined by SEAC and will be between $250 and $500.The
value of all of the awards in any one year will be equivalent, but it may
vary from year to year.The award will not exceed the reasonable cost of
advance-purchase economy airfare and reasonable expenses for lodging, nor
the awardee's actual expenses.In order to spread the travel money as equitably
as possible, not more than two awardees will be selected from any one research
group and no more than three awards will be made to students from any one
educational institution.
Nominations
for travel grants are due to the SEAC awards committee chair by the same
date as the deadline for submission of Pittcon
abstracts—for the 2001 meeting this is in August.The nomination shall consist
of the student's current graduate transcript, a copy of the abstract submitted
to the Pittsburgh Conference, a complete resume including publication list,
and a letter of recommendation from the student's research advisor.The
advisor's letter should include a statement of approximate graduation date
and a short description of the student's speaking ability.A candidate shall
be considered for an award for travel to Pittcon
meetings occurring up to one year after the student's Ph.D. defense.Previous
awardees will not be eligible for further consideration.
Requests
for further information or submissions of nominations should be directed
to:
Professor
Richard M. Crooks
SEAC
Awards Committee
Department
of Chemistry; P. O. Box 30012
Texas
A&M University
College
Station TX77842-3012
Tel: 409-845-5629Fax:
409-845-1399
Email: crooks(at)tamu.edu
Reilley
Awardees
1984 Allen
J. Bard
University
of Texas
1985 Ralph
N. Adams
University
of Kansas
1986 Fred
C. Anson
California
Institute of Technology
1987 Robert
A. Osteryoung
North
Carolina State University
1988 Royce
W. Murray
University
of North Carolina
1989 Theodore
Kuwana
University
of Kansas
1990 Jean-Michel
Savéant
Université
de Paris VII
1991 Stanley
Bruckenstein
SUNY—Buffalo
1992 Stephen
Feldberg
Brookhaven
National Laboratory
1993 Dennis
H. Evans
University
of Delaware
1994 Barry
Miller
Case
Western Reserve University
1995 William
Heineman
University
of Cincinnati
1996 R.
Mark Wightman
University
of North Carolina
1997 Dennis
C. Johnson
Iowa
State University
1998Larry
Faulkner
University
of Illinois
1999Janet
Osteryoung
North
Carolina State University
2000Henry
White
University
of Utah
2001Richard
P. Buck
University
of North Carolina
Young
Investigator Awardees
1993 Leonidas
BachasandWerner
Kuhr
University
of Kentucky University of California,
Riverside
1994 Adrian
C. Michael
University
of Pittsburgh
1995 Mark
Anderson
Virginia
Polytechnic Institute
1996 Louis
A. Coury
Duke
University
1997 Ingrid
Fritsch
University
of Arkansas
1998Greg
Swain
Utah
State University
1999Daniel
Feldheim
North
Carolina State University
2000Merlin
Bruening
Michigan
State University
2001Eric
Bakker
Auburn
University
____________________________________
And
you thought Dick Buck was just SEAC’s 2001 Reilley Awardee?!!!
Where
does Richard P. Buck *really*
lurk??
Here!RICHARD
P. BUCK
N
32 23.351' / W 064 40.885'
The
Richard
P. Buck was wrecked in 1889 near the shore off the East End of Bermuda.
The ship was carrying a general cargo including whisky and kerosene. [Editors’
note:of course it was! …
the man drinks Manhattans!!]
Today
the remains of this ship lie on a sand bottom only a few yards off Tobacco
Bay in St. George's.There is very little left of the ship, except for scattered
timbers, brass spikes and fasternes and other miscellaneous wreckage.This
site can be dived from shore, but as there is very little to see and its
proximity to shore decreases visibility, it is not recommended.
This
would be classified as a beginner-to-novice dive.
—Check
it out!
http://www.makinwaves.bm/Pages/dive25.htm
…
but of course the real place to view R.P.
Buck is at Pittcon®
2001, 5-8 March 2001, in New Orleans!—
____________________________________
Kudos
to SEAC Ex-El Prez Rick McCreery!!
|
|
Richard
L. McCreery,
Dow Professor of Chemistry at Ohio State University and distinguished former
President of SEAC, is the recipient
for 2000 of the ACS Award in
Electrochemistry.
|
Rick
is internationally renowned for his research on the nature of carbon electrodes
and the development of electronic and vibrational spectral probes, particularly
those based on Raman spectroscopy, to characterize the structure of the
electrode surface and the adjacent solution layer,
as well as the study of electron-transfer
dynamics therein.This award will be presented by the Analytical Chemistry
Division of the American Chemical Society during the National ACS Meeting
in Washington, 20-24 August 1999.
Kudos
to SEAC Ex-Secretary, Andy Ewing!!
Andrew
G. Ewing, J.
Lloyd Huck Professor of Natural Sciences and Professor of Chemistry at
the Pennsylvania State University (and soon-to-be-former Secretary of SEAC),
is the recipient of the
American Microchemical Society Benedetti-Pichler Award for 2000.Andy
is an internationally recognized chemist at the interface of neuroscience,
electrochemistry, and separation science.A symposium in his honor, organized
by (Ex-El Prez) Mark Wightman, will be held on Thursday, 2 November
2000 as part of the Eastern Analytical Symposium & Exposition in Atlantic
City, NJ from 29 October – 3 November 2000.
Here
is Professor Ewing water skiing over the wreck of the Richard P. Buck.
—Send
Andy some non-microscopic congratulations: age(at)psu.edu
____________________________________
—Tools
of the Trade:A Review—
As
Editor, I am occasionally sent requests to alert SEAC to electrochemically
related products.Rather than just tell you about the item, I prefer to
accompany the information with a review.This issue explores a software
package, Polar 4 from Dr
Huang Pty Ltd,
Sydney, Australia, which can be used to simulate voltammetric information.
Polar
4.1 was put through its paces by Professor David
Blauch,
Davidson College.
FYI from the Author
Date:
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 15:22:27 +1100
From: "Dr
Huang" <showing(at)bigfoot.com>
Polar
4 for Windows: Electrochemical simulation and data analysis
This
program analytically and digitally simulates voltammograms (polarograms)
for virtually any mechanism at eight electrode geometries (planar, spherical,
semi-spherical, cylindrical, semi-cylindrical, microdisc, thin film, and
rotating electrodes) and for over five techniques:linear sweep and cyclic
voltammetry, and DC, normal pulse, differential-pulse, and square-wave
voltammetry.It outputs current, resistance, conductivity and surface concentration.It
also simulates effects of charge current, resistance, noise, electrolyte,
stripping time, stripping potential, etc.The user can type in the mechanism
of choice.
The
program analyses any ASCII x-y data for detecting peak location, peak value,
semi-derivative, derivative, integral, semi-integral, curve fitting, and
separating overlapped peaks.
It
shows a tip when the user puts the mouse cursor over a label.It can separate
overlapped voltammograms into individuals, and extract real peaks from
voltammogram with noise and baseline.Users can compare by the theoretical
peak values, analytically and digitally simulation, and choose which kinetic
parameters to extract.The data can be imported into other programs (e.g.,
MS Excel).
The
program has been successfully applied to fit experimental voltammograms
of In(III), Cd(II), Pb(II), Tl(I), Cr(III), Zn(II), and binuclear copper
complexes in aqueous and non-aqueous media at mercury, solid metal and
non-metal electrodes (specifically the dropping mercury, hanging mercury
drop, gold, platinum and glassy carbon electrodes) by various electrochemical
techniques (differential pulse, square wave, and pseudo-derivative normal
pulse polarography).
The
program is available from the author or it can be downloaded from his Web
site.
References
1.
W. Huang, T. Henderson, A.M. Bond, K.B. Oldham. Curve fitting to resolve
overlapping voltammetric peaks: model and examples. Anal. Chim. Acta1995,
304,
1-15.
2.
W. Huang, B. Hibbert, Computers & Chem. 1995,
19(4),
433, 435
3.
W. Huang, B. Hibbert, Polar 2.0 for Windows: simulator of voltammogram.
Chem.
in Aus. 1996, 131.
4.
J. Mo, P. Cai, W. Huang, F. Yun, Theory and application on multiple semidifferential
electrochemical stripping analysis with thin mercury film formed in situ.
Acta
Chimica Sinica, 1984, 42(6), 556-561, [CA 101: 162712].
Dr
Huang Pty Ltd
124 Eastern Avenue, Kingsford,
Sydney, NSW 2032, Australia
Phone: 61 2 96620516, 0413
008 019
E-mail to: polarography(at)bigFoot.com
showing(at)bigFoot.com
www.electrochem.net
www.DrHuang.net
www.electroanal.com
FYI from the Reviewer
Polar
4.1 for Windows
Electrochemical
Simulation and Data Analysis Software
Dr.
Weiguang Huang , Dr Huang Pty Ltd
http://www.drmath.com
Reviewed
by David N. Blauch, Department of Chemistry, Davidson College,
Davidson, NC
Polar
4.1 for Windows is a software package that runs under Windows 95/98/NT
and simulates voltammograms for user-defined electrochemical systems. My
evaluation of Polar 4.1 was performed on a Dell Optiplex GXa configured
with a 330 MHz Intel Pentium III processor and 128 Mb RAM running Windows
NT Workstation 4.0 (Service Pack 5).The Polar 4.1 software was obtained
from the DrMath.com web site (http://www.drmath.com).There are two different
packages for installing the software.Polar41.zip (124 Kb) contains only
the Polar 4.1 software itself.Polar 4.1 utilizes the Microsoft Visual Basic
6.0 runtime libraries; if this support is already installed on a machine,
the files can be extracted from Polar41.zip and used immediately.If Visual
Basic support is not available (as was the case for my system), it is necessary
to download the much larger Polar41c.zip (1.6 Mb) file, which contains
a setup program that installs both Polar 4.1 and the Visual Basic 6.0 runtime
libraries.In my experience, Polar 4.1 is not compatible with the most recent
releases of the Visual Basic 6.0 runtime libraries.I found it necessary
to allow the setup program to install all of the Visual Basic files, even
if this means overwriting existing, more recent files.It would be wise
to make backup copies of the affected files, in the event the Visual Basic
files installed for Polar 4.1 are not compatible with other software on
the system.
The
documentation for Polar 4.1 is primitive at best.An HTML version of the
documentation (polar.doc.htm) accompanies the program and can also be obtained
from the DrMath.com web site; there is also an FAQ for the software. Unfortunately,
this documentation merely lists the features of the program without providing
a meaningful explanation of how to use the software, and there are no "help"
features in the software itself.Users will need to learn how to use the
software through intuition and trial-and-error, as there are no explicit
instructions for performing common operations.This limitation is probably
not a major problem for someone who is both computer-savvy and well-informed
about electrochemical experiments, because Polar 4.1 provides a graphical
interface and employs menu options that are straightforward and descriptive.The
absence of documentation might be a problem for users new to voltammetry,
especially students, who lack the fundamental understanding of electrochemistry
necessary to interpret the various menu options.
For
individuals who possess expertise in voltammetry, Polar 4.1 is very easy
to use.Simulation parameters are entered through four options under the
"Input" menu.The "Techniques" option allows one to select from linear sweep
and cyclic voltammetry, DC voltammetry, normal pulse voltammetry, differential
pulse voltammetry, and square-wave voltammetry.The "Mechanism" option provides
a box for defining the chemical and electrochemical reactions."Analytical"
simulations are provided for a collection of common, simple mechanisms
such as E, EE, EC, and CE.For other mechanisms, "digital" simulations are
performed.Templates are provided for heterogeneous electron-transfer and
homogeneous first- and second-order reactions—one simply enters symbols
for the relevant chemical species.The "Instrument" option provides a dialog
for specifying experimental conditions such as starting and final potentials,
interfacial capacitance, solution resistance, and noise.The user may select
from planar, (micro)spherical, (micro)hemispherical, microdisc, (micro)cylindrical,
(micro)hemi-cylindrical, band, rotating disk, and thin-film electrode geometries.Depending
upon the geometry selected, additional boxes appear for the dimensions
of the electrode and other parameters.In the version I tested, the rotating
disk and thin-film electrode geometries were disabled, and I was consequently
unable to unable to test those features.The various chemical and electrochemical
parameters (e.g., diffusion coefficients, concentrations, and rate constants)
are defined under the "Chemicals" option.Polar 4.1 can also has an option
to fit a simulated voltammogram to experimental data, and the "Chemicals"
option allows one to specify which parameters are adjusted in the fitting
process.
The
use of menus of features and templates for the reactions makes configuring
a simulation extremely easy and very attractive for students, who often
require guidance on the types of information required.On the other hand,
the templates create a potentially serious limitation for the reaction
mechanism.The templates provide space for only three heterogeneous electron-transfer
reactions and seven homogeneous reactions, four of which allow for only
one reactant and one product and three of which allow for two reactants
and two products.There are no provisions for more complex reaction stoichiometries.It
is not difficult to find reaction mechanisms that involve more than three
electrode reactions.Polar 4.1 could not, for example, be used to model
the electrochemical properties of buckminsterfullerene.
Once
the simulation has been defined, one simply chooses the "Simulation" option
under the "Run" menu to perform the calculations;the results are displayed
in a window in the program.Output options include current, conductivity,
resistance, and surface concentration, but it is not possible to examine
the concentration profiles.There is an option to copy the voltammogram
to the clipboard, which permits pasting the voltammogram in a document,
as has been done with the cyclic voltammogram shown at the right.The user
may manually scale the plot and control the point and line styles. It is
also possible to overlay voltammograms.The results of a simulation may
be exported as a text file.
A
variety of analysis features are available, including integration, semi-integration,
differentiation, and semi-differential, in addition to a standard peak
finding feature.An import option is provided for analyzing experimental
data, but I found that most of the display and analysis options were nonfunctional
or unreliable in analyzing experimental data.
I
tested the fitting feature of Polar 4.1 using an experimental cyclic voltammogram
for the reduction of RuIII(NH3)63+
to RuII(NH3)62+ in aqueous
solution at a glassy carbon disk electrode.The import feature of Polar
4.1 reads only text files, which means other experimental parameters must
be specified manually. It would be more convenient if Polar 4.1 supported
common binary file types (e.g., BAS or EG&G PAR) and extracted
experimental conditions from the header information.Polar 4.1 does not
permit diffusion coefficients to be optimized in the fitting procedure,
so I attempted to fit the experimental data by optimizing only the standard
potential.Although I supplied accurate values for all parameters, including
the initial value for the standard potential, the fitting operation ended
in an overflow error and instructions to try fitting the data again using
different initial values.I repeated this process with various choices of
initial values but always encountered the same error.At no point were values
for the parameters or calculated voltammograms displayed, so I was unable
to evaluate the progress of the fitting process and identify possible problems.
A
notable limitation of Polar 4.1 is the inability to control the numerical
parameters (e.g., grid size, scaling, convergence criteria) for
the implicit finite difference algorithm employed in the program.The failure
of my attempts to fit an experimental voltammogram serve as an example
of the need for some control over the numerical method, not only to avoid
a complete failure of the algorithm but also to improve the performance
of the algorithm and to examine the convergence properties of the algorithm.Like
most programs written in recent years, the graphical interface for entering
information is inextricably tied to the computational engine in Polar 4.1,
making it impossible to automate simulations by running the program from
the command line with an input file containing the necessary simulation
parameters. This limitation is problematic for those researchers who wish
to thoroughly explore and characterize the behavior of relatively complicated
systems, where hundreds or thousands of simulations may be required.
Polar
4.1 is licensed at four levels.The program as downloaded from the web will
run without an access code, but its features are extremely limited (no
fitting, import, or export features and only one heterogeneous and one
homogeneous reaction, first-order kinetics only, may be defined).More advanced
features are available under the Student (US $99), Standard (US $499),
and Full (US $799) versions.The documentation, available at the DrMath.com
web site, lists the features available under each license.
Summary.Polar
4.1 is a very basic, easy to use program for simulating a variety of voltammetric
responses.The program appears best suited for relatively simple electrochemical
systems, such as those used in teaching voltammetry at the undergraduate
level.Users should not expect detailed and explicit documentation, however.
The limited documentation is at most a minor disadvantage for knowledgeable
users, but individuals unfamiliar with voltammetric notation and conventions
should consult a textbook on voltammetry before using Polar 4.1.Unfortunately,
I cannot recommend Polar 4.1 for complex and difficult simulations or for
curve-fitting experimental data.In my experience, the numerical methods
are not sufficiently robust or configurable for most research problems.
…
Thanks, Dave, for walking the interested user through Dr. Huang’s program
… having waltzed (badly) a time or two with Visual Basic:I salute you!!
…
—More
web-based electrochemistry—
FYI
LATEST
DISCUSSIONS on CHEMWEB
Voltammetry:
http://chemweb.com/forums/Thread.cfm?CFApp=1&Thread_ID=699&mc=2
____________________________________
—Postdoctoral
Openings!!—
Dermot
Diamond / Dublin City University
The
sensors research team at DCU have been successful in attracting significant
support from the Irish Government (ca. £9.0M).We are building a new
sensors research center at the university, with £4.0M in new equipment
which will be finished by the end of 2001.We are beginning a program of
recruitment for the first of five postdoctoral positions.If you know of
anyone who might be interested in these or in Faculty Research Lectureships
(which we hope to introduce this year), please contact Dermot Diamond.General
information on the sensor research team can be obtained at the website:
http://www.dcu.ie/~ncsr/Frame.htm
Professor
Dermot Diamond
Associate Director
National Centre for Sensor
Research
Dublin City University
Dublin 9
Phone :+353-1-7045404Fax
:+353-1-7045503
Email: dermot.diamond(at)DCU.IE
Pat Unwin / University of Warwick
A
postdoctoral position is available in the group of Professor Pat Unwin
at the University of Warwick, UK.The position, available for up to two
years, will involve the development and application of combined scanning
electro-chemical microscopy-Langmuir trough techniques to investigate chemical
processes in molecular monolayers at liquid/liquid interfaces.Full details
of the position and an on-line application form is available at:
http://www.jobs.ac.uk/jobfiles/AC726.html
Prospective
applicants are also welcome to contact Pat Unwin at: p.r.unwin(at)warwick.ac.uk
Details
of research in the Unwin group can be found at:
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/electrochemistry
Professor
Pat Unwin
Department of Chemistry
University of Warwick
CoventryCV4 7AL
UNITED KINGDOM
Phone: +44 (0)24
7652 3264
Fax: +44 (0)24 7652 4112
Email: P.R.Unwin(at)warwick.ac.uk
_______________________________________________________________________________
OOOur
Continuing and Highly Popular SEAC FeatureOO
— Name
That Electrochemical Nerd * !!
Pictured
above is last issue’s entrant in “Name that Electrochemical Nerd”.The
mystery man is none other than Robert Nowak, Program Manager Extraordinaire,
at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
And
who is the winner of the coveted Nowackian Power Point presentation?‘tis
a quandary.The first e-response was fromRoyce Murray (Fri,
25 Feb 2000 09:08:21 -0500),
who wrote: “That nerd
looks like a former postdoc who now gives away taxpayer $.”
And
then Henry White chimed in (Fri, 25 Feb 2000 09:54 –0700) with:
“easy, nowak”, followed by Dick Crooks (Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:10:23
-0600): “Bob Nowak!”And bringing up the rear (Sat, 4 Mar 2000 11:45:24
-0500) was Tito Abruña, “D—The most recent "loser-echem"
is clearly none other than Bob "The-Man" Nowak.”
Who
won?
Date:
Fri, 25 Feb 2000 09:08:21 -0500
From: Debra
Rolison <rolison(at)nrl.navy.mil>
To: RMC <crooks(at)tamu.edu>
Subject:
Re: Nerd
Dick—
… actually ... Henry pointed out that Royce should be disqualified because
he was Bob's postdoctoral advisor [even more conflictive-of-interest, the
photo was taken during a poker game in Royce’s downstairs’ family room
by Harry Finklea] ... and I pointed out to Henry that he should
be disqualified—
because
Robert rescued Lynard the Rat (Henry's pet, who, until Robert stepped in,
was fated to be toast, as HSW prepared to flee Chapel Hill for Austin)
... so you (unless I hear otherwise from Robert) are the WINNER!!!
—Fight
it out amongst yourselves, gentlemen … —
—Pictured
below is this issue’s entrant in “Name that Electrochemical Nerd”.Again,
the first correct guess (as
determined by directly contacting the pictured-herein EN)
will win an autographed copy of the EN’s latest reprint.—
—…and
please send in your candidates (and mystery photographs) for next issue’s
entrant in “Name That Electrochemical Nerd”!!—
* a.k.a. “Loser-Electrochemist!”,
see SEAC
Communications, 1998, 14(1).
________________________________________________________________________________
Plan
your attendance accordingly!
Eleventh
Australasian Electrochemistry Conference
10-14 December 2000
University of Western Sydney,
Parramatta Campus
New South Wales, Australia
Theme:
Advancing Electrochemistry in the New Millennium
A
cordial invitation is extended to all those interested in pure and applied
electrochemistry to participate in the 11th Australasian Electrochemistry
Conference, which is sponsored by the Electrochemistry Division of the
Royal Australian Chemical Institute.In particular, being the division's
first conference in the new millennium, it will provide a unique opportunity
for discussing recent and future advances in the various areas. It is anticipated
that the conference will have a local, national and international flavor
and visitors from outside the region are most welcome.
Contributions
are welcome on all aspects of electrochemistry:batteries, corrosion and
passivation, electroanalysis, electrochemical smelting, electrode kinetics,
electrometallurgy, electrolytes, electrosynthesis, chemo-sensors and bio-sensors,
mineral processing, nuclear electrochemistry, modified electrodes, inorganic
and organic electrochemistry, photoelectrochemistry and polymer electrochemistry.Invited
lectures and special sessions are planned on some of these topics.The interaction
between fundamental and applied aspects will be highlighted and encouraged.
Scientific
Committee
Sam
Adeloju / University of Western SydneyPeter
Lay / University of Sydney
Alan
Bond / Monash UniversityIan Ritchie
/ Murdoch University
Bob
Cattrall / La Trobe UniversityMaria
Skylas-Kazacos / University of New South Wales
Stephen
Fletcher / CSIROVicky Vicente-Beckett
/ University of Central Queensland
Brynn
Hibbert / University of New South WalesGordon
Wallace / University of Wollongong
Call for
Papers—Abstracts:Oral
presentations (20 min) and/or posters are invited in any field of electrochemistry.Abstracts
(300-500 words) are required by 31 July 2000.Please print the abstract
on one A4 page only, (camera-ready copy) with 25-mm margins all around.There
is no standard format required for abstracts, but they should give the
full title, authors name and address and be suitable for direct photocopying.Send
all abstracts to:
Professor
Sam Adeloju
11AEC Chairman
CERAT, School of Civic
Engineering & Environment, Building P
University of Western Sydney
PO Box 10
Kingswood, NSW 2747
Australia
Phone: 61
2 4736 0811Fax: 61 2 4736 0457
E-mail: cerat(at)uws.edu.au.
—For further information
and to register, check out: http://www.nepean.uws.edu.au/cerat/11aec/
____________________________________________________________________________
Title IX Editorial—One Woman’s
Response
Oregon
Graduate Institute, Beaverton OR
Dear colleagues—After passing
out copies of Debra’s guest-editorial (C&EN 13 March 2000, p.
5), a postdoc brought his photocopy into my lab.He said, “Anna, this is
for you!”To which I replied, “Actually, it’s for you, from me—I
put the copy in your mailbox.”
Everywhere
I go I’m told that working as a women in science is “my” issue.It isn’t
one to be shared by all of my colleagues—it
is mine all alone.And yes, being a loud-mouth feministcertainly pegs me
readily identifiable as an advocate for women science within the social
context of the laboratory.Funny, the same folks that dismiss the women-in-science
“issue” as pertaining exclusively to me are the folks that send
me their grad students, postdocs, and staff to mediate or consult with
when perceived or imagined issues of gender or gender-equity get raised.I
definitely know that I am not alone—for
quite often my work-day consists of supporting and networking contemporaries
and younger women and men.
The skills
honed in methods development and analytical trouble-shooting easily apply
to the climate of the laboratory.Yet, the skill set so coveted in analytical
chemistry, applied to the workplace is consistently undervalued and pushed
into the category of “not-relevant” to my research plan and objectives.
Whether it
was growing up the oldest of five children or my experience in the environmental
analytical lab during the “just in time” management craze of the 80’s,
I don’t think that women are the only ones to benefit from a teamed approach.The
image of the “isolated crazy scientist alone in the lab” does not jive
with the reality and necessities of contemporary academic research or industrial
laboratories.Perhaps my perspective is skewed because I’ve always done
interdisciplinary research and analyses, but it definitely seems to me
that a “new” model in contrast to the prevailing hierarchy is necessary
to continue to keep the brains from draining out of academia.Disproportionately
we see women leave (graduate school and postdoctoral assignments).Men and
women are both bailing out of schools and into dotcoms and other industries
more conducive to the lifestyles they wish to live, with a tax bracket
that is more amenable to leisure-time.
To improve the work place
for future women in science, I work with two programs here in Oregon that
are trying to change the “image” of scientists.Both programs are affiliated
with Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology’s Saturday Academy.Saturday
Academy, since 1983, has created educational opportunities for students
and teachers by enlisting community professionals to share their expertise
and equipment in hands-on classes, workshops, and mentorships.Special emphasis
is placed on the sciences, mathematics, technology and role modeling of
careers in these fields.
I work with
the co-educational program ASE, “Apprenticeships in Science and Engineering”
(http://www.ogi.edu/satacad/ase).
ASE targets high school students for summer internships.I help to recruit
mentors and participate in the yearly summer conference.I am more heavily
involved (time-wise) coordinating site visits with the Advocates for Women
in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics (AWSEM) program (http://www.awsem.org)
which targets young girls.We host after school science clubs in our labs
about six times a year.In part due to my departmental affiliation (Department
of Environmental Science and Engineering), most of the labs the girls do
are chemistry labs, although this year we had a really strong Computer
Science component.Visit the web pages the girls made at (http://www.ese.ogi.edu/~awsem).
Why target
girl-only audiences? is the question I most often hear from my colleagues.If
female enrollment in degree programs has increased (in some instances up
to 50% of the student pool) why do we need “girl-only” programs in middle
and high school?As it turns out, most of the Saturday Academy staff are
women, the director of Saturday Academy, Dr. Gail Whitney, is a woman.Yet,
despite the administration of the program being fairly inclusive of women,
many of the classes offered in science and technology (targeting ages 9-16)
were enrolled exclusively by boys.Even when the classes were offered for
“free”—no girls were taking
advantage of the classes offered.So in 1993/4 Dr. Whitney wrote a grant
application to the National Science Foundation to start up a handful of
after-school science clubs to try and increase the participation of girls
in the extracurricular science classes.From that pilot project AWSEM was
created.AWSEM started out with 7 NSF-sponsored clubs and within 5 years,
67 independently funded clubs existed.Pilot programs are underway in three
other states.A welcome “side effect” of the coordination of the AWSEM project
and participation in the program as a mentoris the opportunity to interact
with dozens of other women scientists from around the Portland Area and
as well as the network opportunities with Women in Technology International
(WITI).
With my male
colleagues—who still don’t
understand about the accessibility issues faced by women in science in
academia—I try for the
more “tangible” observation, I tell them to look around the cafeteria next
time they eat lunch.What you will see are solitary faculty reviewing a
manuscript, a group of guys (read: males), or occasionally a group of guys
dining with the one woman from their research group.What you don’t see
at lunch, but for a few times a year, is a table full of women faculty,
staff, and research associates. When you do have the odd circumstance to
be more than two women (senior staff) together in the hall–a very wide
berth around you is duly noted as the “faculty” literally run past.The
“issue” of women is science is not a women-only issue; it is a work-place
“issue”.
So where is
the electrochemistry?Electrochemistry is why we read SEAC Communications.Well,
here is where the electrochemistry bit comes in … when I am engaged in
my research goals (exclusive of the “quality of life” issues) here are
some of the projects I work on with electrochemical tools.
|
|
|
The flume and AWSEM students. Here
are the AWSEM girls exploring the chamber in which most of my electrochemistry
is conducted. The monstrosity they are so curious about is a rotating annular
flume. You can’t see the microelectrodes (unfortunately) for all the suspended
solids in the river water overlying the Columbia River sediment bed. We
are using the microelectrodes to track chemical changes (fate and transport)
across the sediment-water interface subsequent to resuspension of the sediment.(photo
taken by Middle School Science teacher, Laurie Denio).
|
Microelectrode
in bacterial agar. You
can see the microelectrodes, they are positioned in a bacterial culture
agar in order to explore the microgradients of Fe(II) and oxygen across
the interfaces of each density layer. (photo
by Anna Farrenkopf)
|
|
Side-long
and end-on view of a microelectrode; 450X
ocular magnification.
(Video
capture by
Anna
Farrenkopf).
All
the
microelectrodes
are
constructed
on-site
at
the Oregon
Graduate
Institute. |
____________________________________
Starting
Early!
—Grow
your own electrochemist!—
Ingrid
Fritsch
(University of Arkansas) holds a proposed entrant in the SEAC 2025 membership
base:Connor Wilkens Fritsch, who was
born on 26 January 2000, at 6 lbs 12 oz and 19.25
inches long.Blond of hair, blue of eye, and healthy.
Ingrid
writes: “A perfect baby ... but I think that I am biased.He will start
learning the elements on the periodic chart after he learns his colors!”
—send
your congratulations to Professors Fritsch and Wilkins (a.k.a.: Ingrid
and Charlie) at:
ifritsch(at)comp.uark.edu
____________________________________
SEAC
on the Move!
Another
Victim of the Creeping Epidemic of Electrochemists Morphing into Chairs!!!
—David
Williams, has also
succumbed to the pandemic and is
now head of the Department of Chemistry at University College, London—however,
he did escape administrative clutches long enough to attend the 197th
Meeting of the Electrochemical Society in Toronto, 14-18 May 2000, where
he was spotted checking out the Canadian beer at the Monday night poster
session/mixer.
—send
your condolences (and beer) to:
d.e.williams(at)ucl.ac.uk
—Eiichi
Shoji
has recently joined Michael Freund's group at Caltech as a postdoctoral
associate.Contact Eiichi at:
shoji(at)caltech.edu
—David
Atherton writes that effective Friday, 31 March 2000 at 6:00 PM, his
email address will change to:
David.Atherton(at)Moltech.Com
____________________________________
From
the (E-)Mailbag
—Ex-El-Prez
R. Mark Wightman’s
Pre-Seminar
Ritual—
Self-stimulation
of neurotransmitter release (as submitted by an anonymous SEAC stringer).
In message Fri,
25 Feb 2000 10:52:28, Jim Anderson writes:
Debra—Thanks
for the announcement.Just out of curiosity, couldn't you arrange to send
copies of SEAC Communications as attachments to your e-mail announcement?If
you count the aggregate number of hours needed for all SEAC members to
go to the website and download the newsletter, a direct mailing would be
a lot faster, though it might have an impact on your mail server.Is there
a technical reason why this is not feasible?Just a thought.
See
you in New Orleans.
—Hi,
Jim:I’m afraid that the only realistic answer to your proposition, for
the reason you suggest, is:argggggggghhhhh!!!!NFW!!My e-notification goes
out to ca. 800 electrochemists.Best.—
In message Wed, 1 Mar
2000 15:48:09 -0500, Robert Rodgers writes:
Debra—I
enjoyed the WETS expose, sorry I missed it!
As
far as the two-column discussion goes, I'm converting my website to two
columns as I go along.Although you have to scroll up and down, it's easier
on fossilized eye muscles to scan half a line! I could sit further from
the screen with the same effect, if I could read the characters at that
distance!
In
case you need filler for the next Communications, I have just added
a page to one of my websites which asks the piercing question: "If you
made a movie about electrochemists, who would play Martin Fleischmann?"That
page also touches on the question: "Why ask?"The URL is:
http://members.home.net/rsrodgers/echemmovies.htm
or
look at the Treasure Map at:
http://drive.to/delorean-motorcar
As
I said, if you are ** desperate ** for filler....
See
you in the Big Easy!
—moi??desperate?—
____________________________________
Reminders
to SEAC Members
—and
now a message from Jim Cox, Chair of the Nominations Committee—
(yes,
there is a committee, not just Jim!)
As stated in
the Society’s By-laws, suggestions for candidates can be made by SEAC members
to the Nominations Committee at any time during the year—we welcome your
input.The names of potential candidates can be forwarded to: coxja(at)miavx1.muohio.edu.The
preparation of the next ballot will begin in late September 2000.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Special
Exclusive!
Daren
Caruana
(d.j.caruana(at)ucl.ac.uk)—Cartoonist
and Electrochemist (and Lecturer at the University College, London)—returns
with further adventures (speaking of Martin Fleischmann) in the
realm of electrochemical reality:
