A. Gomes, M.I. da Silva Pereira / Electrochimica Acta 51 (2006) 1342–1350
1345
are the current density without and with surfactants at a con-
stant potential value, respectively [20]. The coverage values
obtained for E = −1275 mV versus SCE were 0.19 and 0.36
for the SDS and CTAB, respectively.
In the case of Triton X-100, a non-ionic surfactant with
oxyethylene groups, it is possible that both adsorption and
complex formation occur. Taking into account that the sur-
factant concentration is above the cmc, complex forma-
tion with the adsorbed molecules could be promoted what
would explain the strong increase on the zinc deposition
overpotential. Stoychev et al. proposed a similar interpre-
tation for the electrodeposition of copper in the presence of
polyethyleneglicol [21].
The deposits obtained in the presence of Triton X-100
(Fig. 3d), are more irregular, with a distinct morphology, con-
stituted by cauliflower type agglomerates. Comparing with
the previous micrographs it can be concluded that this non-
ionic surfactant have a strong influence on the Zn deposition
process. Trejo et al. have reported a similar morphology [4]
for zinc electrodeposits obtained from acidic solution in the
presence of organic polyethoxylate (PEG) additives. Sulphur
is also detected on the coating surface.
For the deposits obtained with the surfactant-free solu-
tion, some protuberances were observed, due to the presence
of hydrogen bubbles adsorbed on the substrate surface and/or
on the zinc deposits (Fig. 4), during the deposition process.
The morphology found in this region is very peculiar. Flake
forms constituted by Zn, S and O, were identified using EDS.
Similar features were observed by Cachet et al. [23] for the
corrosion of zinc coatings in sulphate medium. This fact was
explained by the formation of a zinc-hydroxi-sulphate, due to
local pH changes. For the deposits obtained in the presence
of the organic molecules, this morphology due to the adsorp-
tion of hydrogen bubbles was not detected. It seems that the
surfactant molecules on the electrode interface inhibit this
phenomenon.
3
.2. SEM/EDS characterization
The electrochemical studies have shown that the addition
of small amounts of surfactant modifies the electrodeposi-
tion process. In order to determine whether these changes
were reflected in the deposit morphology and composition,
an SEM/EDS study was performed.
The data show that the surface morphology and the crys-
tal shape and size are markedly affected by the presence
and nature of the surfactants. The EDS spectra obtained in
different local points of the electrodeposits surface showed
that they were mainly composed by zinc. Sulphur and oxy-
gen were also detected and their presence may be associated
with the corrosion of the deposits or with occluded solu-
tion. Finally the detected carbon can be due to either some
surfactant incorporation on the deposit or atmospheric con-
tamination. A complementary analysis must be performed in
order to clarify this situation.
In the absence of organic molecules in the electrodepo-
sition bath (Fig. 3a), the deposit display the hexagonal zinc
plates aligned parallel to the substrate as usual for zinc elec-
trodeposits [11].
The deposits, prepared from solutions with SDS (Fig. 3b),
are very uniform with plate form crystals, perpendicularly
oriented to the substrate. When compared with the zinc
deposits from additive-free solution, the grains are relatively
smaller. Kelly et al. observed similar effects [22] for copper
deposition in the presence of sulphur containing compounds.
EDS analysis reveals the presence of Zn, O and S. Sulphur
could be due to the incorporation of the surfactant in the coat-
ing.
3.3. Structural characterization
Figs. 5–8 display the diffractograms for the hexagonal
Zn deposits obtained in different conditions. It is clear that
the presence of the surfactant, on the electrodeposition bath,
affects the crystallographic orientation and crystallinity of
the deposits.
In the absence of organic molecules in the deposition bath
(Fig. 5), the relative intensity of the lines indicates a strong
(0 0 2) orientation for the zinc electrodeposits [24]. This tex-
ture is in accordance with the hexagonal surface morphology
usually detected for these deposits. According to Li et al. [25],
the development of different textures is possible during the
growth of metal coatings. This is a consequence of surface
energy differences, which are responsible for the selective
growth of the grains that have the lowest surface free energy.
For the zinc crystal the lowest surface free energy is the basal
(0 0 2) plane, owing to its compactness [26]. Therefore, this
texture develops during the zinc growth in the absence of
surfactants, assuming that the adsorbed hydrogen does not
modify the metal surface energy.
In the presence of CTAB (Fig. 3c), the zinc grain size
is smaller, indicating a modification on the competition
between nucleation and crystal growth. It is also notewor-
thy to mention the porous nature of the coating due to the
needle shape grains. The morphology change can be associ-
ated to a strong blocking effect of the cationic surfactant,
which causes an enlargement of the nuclei renewal rates,
leading to an increase of nuclei number and needle growth.
On the coating surface, the presence of black points was
observed associated with an S line in the corresponding EDS
spectrum.
For the deposits obtained from solutions containing SDS
(Fig. 6), CTAB (Fig. 7) and Triton X-100 (Fig. 8), the
most intense diffraction lines are (1 0 1), (1 1 0), and (1 0 1)
respectively. In addition, a marked decrease on the basal
(0 0 2) plane intensity is found. The crystallographic orien-
tation changes because the metal’s surface energy is mod-
ified by the adsorption of the organic molecules [27]. The
variation on the crystallographic orientation by the pres-
ence of the surfactants should be due to their different
specific interactions with the different crystal planes, that
induces different growth mechanisms. The hindrance of the