Talk:Electroplating/Archive 1

Archive 1

I'm not convinved this is the reverse of a battery. The metal deposition occurs at the Cathode whilst metal depletion occurs at the Anode.

Hull Cell

The Hull Cell is a quite bit more clever than most give credit for. Effectively it's a 30-60-90 right triangle, sides are 1, 2,square root of 3. the front part is a square of unit 1 size. (if the volume of the electrolyte is correct it is also a cube of unit 1 size.) The power varies with the inverse square law. The squared distance and the square root of the triangle cancel out, so no square root is now required, and the power (voltage and amperage) is known at the closest point of the test piece. The falloff, volts, amps and resistance of the electroplating can now be calculated with really simple arithmetic. My point being, while the volume of electrolyte is important for the chemist running the test, the actual units used are arbitrary, and a Hull Cell can be made of any volume, an ideal Hull Cell will always have a 1,2,√3 ratios.

The 30° relation of the anode to the cathode is what's important as well as the 2x relationship in size of the cathode to the anode, the exterior of the tank is irrelevant, could as well be a test in the big electroplating bath, like an infinite baffle test for loudspeakers.

DIN 50957 varies quite a bit from the ideal triangle, tank dimensions are to theoretical sharp corners, 64, and 102 to the hypotenuse, resulting in a current distribution around 5.2 log X. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271732116_Simulation_of_Current_Density_for_Electroplating_on_Silicon_Using_a_Hull_Cell

...onto conductive surface

How does the electroplating of plastic that Feynmann developed work? Josh Parris # 06:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• There are several techniques. all use a conductive layer put on the plastic and then plating on to that.

Prehistory in Electroplating

Is it worth dedicating a space to a loosely founded and very disputed speculation? There is much speculation about what the so-called Baghdad batteries are, and they being electrical batteries is just one hypothesis, which is not well supported; that these batteries were used for electroplating, something even more disputed; so we have, in this article, a reference to an unsupported hypothesis used to support a highly-debated hypothesis. Is this correct?
I think that Prehistory should be removed from the article until some substantial support for the Baghdad battery theory is found. Paiconos 18:41, 4 May 2005 (UTC).

• I tend to agree particulary as it has not yet been established that the artifact known as the Baghdad Battery, was in fact a battry at all! DV8 2XL 01:45, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, no more input has been given, and the only comment is in agreement... I'll remove the Prehistory section. --Paiconos 16:56, 22 September 2005

The Baghdad Battery re-appeared in the History section sometime around Dec 2006. The original reason for its removal still stands, and the electro-plating theory of the batteries is even weaker now, from reading the Wiki page about the batteries. I'm going to remove it again. Brianonn 07:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

• It seems the Baghdad battery has made it back into the History section. I agree that this specious and speculative statement seems a non-viable entry, particularly for this page. The provided reference link comes off as somewhat of a propaganda push-piece from a non-objective POV. I'm deleting the entry, unless someone wants to modify it in a NPOV manner by emphasizing the extremely theoretical nature of the content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.103.134 (talk) 03:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

RF current

It is said in the article that "Silver plating is also popular for RF connectors because radio frequency current flows primarily on the surface of its conductor; the connector will thus have the strength of brass and the conductivity of silver."

As a student of physics, I have to point out that on any metal conductor, current always flows primarily on the surface of the conductor, be it RF current or any AC or DC current. It follows from the principles of electromagnetism.

What may motivate the use of silver in the surface might be that RF applications are more sensitive to losses than your regular electrical application (higher power emmiters to compensate for the losses cost more than higher power generators to compensate losses in other electrical applications), thus justifying the use of expensive silver coating to improve the quality of the conductors. HOWEVERRRRR, this is my speculation - although it does makes sense it is not based on any expert knowledge in the field. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.22.225.220 (talk • contribs) 06:06, March 28, 2006 (UTC)

See Skin effect. In short, the depth of the conductive layer is frequency dependent with higher frequencies flowing shallower than low frequencies. --DV8 2XL 07:39, March 28, 2006

I stand corrected. Sorry about all the confusion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.22.225.220 (talk • contribs) 05:15, April 18, 2006 (UTC)

Brush plating

Some parts of the International Space Station were electroplated using a brush technique due to the impracticality of building a tank large enough to immerse the parts and because it wasn't required to plate the entire part. http://www.pfonline.com/articles/pfd0033.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.136.145.242 (talk • contribs) 20:39, December 3, 2006 (UTC)

Plated ware

I've done a complete rewrite of the related Plated ware article, which was an untouched 1911 Britannica entry and hence woefully out of date; as I'm not any kind of expert in commercial plating, is anyone in a position to take a look and make sure I haven't made any particularly stupid mistakes? - Iridescent (talk to me!) 12:57, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Electrolytic bath

I wonder is there any buffer or compound need to be added to the solution of electroplating, in order to prevent the formation of porous metal? The article haven't mentioned about that.Superdvd (talk) 07:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hydrophobic or Hydrophilic (Cleanliness)?

"...ASTM F22 describes a version of this test. This test does not detect hydrophobic contaminants, but the electroplating process can displace these easily since the solutions are water-based." 189.42.228.115 (talk) 07:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

What is the question here? Wizard191 (talk) 21:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

The opening paragraph contains the following text:

(generally chromium to a combustion ampere of at least 563 volt)

Even to a layman, this looks suspiciously meaningless. Could someone who is knowledgeable about this subject either repair this text, or delete it? Many thanks. Dolphin51 (talk) 04:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Johann Wilhelm Ritter

Is it possible to recheck the claim on this page and on Johann Wilhelm Ritter ? about the invention of electroplating ? thanks Mion (talk) 00:44, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Picture might be good.

I find it too confusing without... :( 69.180.172.142 (talk) 22:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Electroless deposition

Something wrong with "Electroless deposition" section, I guess... It says: Failed to parse (syntax error): M^{z+} + Red_{solution} \stackrel{\text{catalytic surface}} \Longrightarrow M_{solid deposite) + Oxy_{solution} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charon77 (talk • contribs) 18:49, 17 April 2012 (UTC)