11/14/2010

Electroplating Plastics

This is the html version of the file http://realscience.breckschool.org/upper/fruen/files/research/2003/maddiemegan.doc. Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

Electroplating Plastics
Madeline Roe and Megan Fallon 2003
Abstract: In our project we plated copper onto graphite designs on plastic. The graphite design was 2.54 cm2 . The plastic was 5.08 cm2 . We tested how an amperage range from 0.1 to 1.5 amps affected the percentage of copper that was plated on the plastic design. We found that the amps. did indeed have a large effect on the amount of copper electroplated. At 0.1 amps, the percentage of copper plated on the plastic was 77%. At 1.5 amps, the percentage of copper electroplated increased to 97 %. At each amperage, the amount of copper increased. The quality or the appearance of each separate design did not have a direct correlation with the amperage. At 1.5 amps, the quality was the least appealing. The trial that yielded the best quality was 1.0 amps. This leads us to believe that there was no relationship between the visual outcome of the electroplated design and the amperage. Introduction: The purpose of the project was to electroplate designs on plastic and study the effects of different ammeter settings during the process. The typical amp while electroplating was at 0.50 amps, we tested the effects of the following amps.: (0.1, 0.3, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.5). Hypothesis: We hypothesized that as the amps increase, a higher percentage of copper would be electroplated on the plastic. We hypothesized this because we thought that at a higher amperage the current would be stronger and more copper would therefore be plated. Background Section: Electroplating is a process that was developed to electroplate a thin layer of a metal on another material, such as plastic as in the case of this project (1). The industry was developed to plate metals like copper, zinc, or silver on other less expensive metals (1). This process was crafted to be used on jewelry, tableware, car parts, cans, circuit boards in calculators, and computer chips (1). The process requires the use of electrolytic cells (2). Cells which have negative E cell potentials, positive H values, and are non spontaneous are called electrolytic cells (2). Electroplating that we did involved two parts: a reduction equation and an oxidation equation (2). The reduction equation for our project was: Cu 2+ (aq) + 2e- Cu (s). The oxidation equation for our project was: Cu (s) Cu 2+ (aq) + 2e-. Reduction took place on the object being plated while oxidation took place on the copper slab in the plating bath (2). When electroplating, the bath was filled with CuSO4 solution. Our electroplating required an outside power source, a cathode (where the reduction occurs), an anode (where oxidation occurs), and the plating solution (CuSO4) (2). The copper slab in the bath released 2 e-. These electrons traveled through the wire and up to the power source. See Figure 1 for a diagram of this setup. They then continue through the wire and out into the plating solution. The CuSO4 then picks up the electrons. and the copper was electroplated on to the plastic design (2). The sulfate ions are spectator ions (1). The amount of metal plated was calculated using this equation: ( number of coulombs / 1 sec. * total number of sec. * 1 Faraday / 96500 coulombs * 1 mole e- / 1 Faraday * 1 mole Cu / 2 mole e- * 63.6 g Cu / 1 mole Cu).

webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear

1/4

11/14/2010

Electroplating Plastics

During the research, we added a controlled amount of brightener each trial. We added an extra 1.0 mL for each trial. Copper brightener was added in order to brighten the appearance of the copper that was plated during the trial. Brighteners are organic molecules that tend to improve the specularity of the deposit by reducing both surface roughness and grain size variation (3). Brighteners are particularly prone to breakdown under the heavy electrolyte use of production plating conditions, and variations in concentrations can have dramatic effects in deposit film properties (3). Ms. Gilbert said that the effectiveness and proper amount of copper brightener that should be added is undetermined and that at some point in our project we added a detrimental amount to the copper sulfate solution (4). We tested the effect that different amps have on the electroplating process. The suggested level was 0.50 amps. However, we tested amps that were both greater and smaller than this to determine how they affected the amount of copper plated.

Figure 1: Diagram of electroplating set up

Procedure: (adapted from project by Floyd Sturtevant and Ken Hartman)

1. We set up apparatus (see Figure 1), filled the plating bath with already prepared copper sulfate plating solution with 1.0 mL of brightener added each trial. 2. We used sandpaper to scratch up a small 2 by 2 in. plastic sheet until it was completely scratched in every area. This made the pencil design easier to do. Using a soft graphite pencil, we drew a 1 by 1 in. square within the original plastic sheet. We filled in the 1 by 1 in. square completely with a # 2 pencil so that the design was completely covered with graphite pencil. We made a small pin prick hole at the top of the plastic sheet. We drew a bold line with the pencil, connecting the hole to the design. 3. We strung copper wire electrode through the plastic and bent the copper wire that was strung through the plastic so that it was secure and connected to the graphite on the plastic. 4. We set the plastic design on a towel and put it in the fume hood. We used a brush to paint silver conducting (Electrodag #415) from the copper wire electrode to the graphite drawing. We then cleaned the brush in the acetone after using the paint. Then we massed the entire plastic design, with graphite drawing, paint, and copper wire. After words, we attached the copper wire to an alligator clip. 5. We added 1.0 mL of copper brightener before electroplating. (This was done for each trial.) 6. We hooked up the plating bath so that the plastic was in the cathode, submerging the design so that the entire piece of plastic was in the solution. However, we did not submerge the plastic so far that the alligator clip was in the solution. We made sure that the alligator clip does not touch the plating solution. 7. We then turned on the aquarium bubbler. 8. We set the ammeter at 0.50 amps for the first trial 9. We plated for 75 minutes, and made sure the apparatus remained constant to how it was when it was first set up. 10. When finished, we washed off the copper design thoroughly with water. Then squirted the design with acetone under the fume hood. After it was completely dry, we massed the plastic design. 11. We calculated the theoretical mass of the copper that was plated on the plastic and determined the theoretical yield. We used the following equations: ( number of coulombs / 1 sec. * total number of sec. * 1 Faraday / 96500 coulombs * 1 mole e- / 1 Faraday *
webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear 2/4

11/14/2010

Electroplating Plastics

1 mole Cu / 2 mole e- * 63.6 g Cu / 1 mole Cu) 12. We then repeated steps 1-9 using different amps (0.1, 0.3, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.5).

Results:
Figure 2 displays how the level of amps affected the percentage of copper that was electroplated in all six trials. As the amp level increased, the percentage of copper that was electroplated went up in each trial. At 0.1 amps., the theoretical yield was 77%. At 0.3 amps., the theoretical yield was 79%. At 0.6 amps., the theoretical yield was 87%. At 0.8 amps., the theoretical yield was 90%. At 1.0 amps., the theoretical yield was 93%. At 1.5 amps., the theoretical yield was 97%. Figure 3 represents the quality of the copper plated on a scale from one to six, one being the best quality. This graph shows no correlation between the amperage land the quality of the copper. At 1.0 amps the appearance was most appealing. At 1.5 amps, the quality was least visually appealing. At 0.3 amps, the quality was third best. Therefore there is no direct or indirect correlation between amperage and quality. Discussion: After completing the project, we discovered a direct relationship between the amperage level and the percentage of copper plated on the design. Our hypothesis was therefore correct. We found that as the amperage increased, the amount of copper plated also increased. Figure 2, represents this correlation. We did six trials electroplating different amperage levels, ranging from 0.1 amps to 1.5 amps, for a duration of 75 minutes. However, we also included an experimental trial, testing to see if the 1.0 mL of brightener we added each trial was affecting the outcome of the copper plated. We did this because each time we added 1.0 mL of brightener, we worried that we were testing more than 1 variable. It was necessary to see if we were testing two variables. In the experimental trial, we tested to see if the brightener had any affect on the amount of copper that was yielded on the plastic. We did this because our variable was the amperage level and we needed to learn if the brightener had any effect. For the brightener experimental trial we plated the design at 0.8 amps, because this was was the amperage level that we used for our first trial. We did this experimental trial as our seventh trial, so there was 6.0 mL of brightener in the solution. The first trial only had 1.0 mL. The results of this experimental trial were extremely close to our first trial. The copper percentage plated on the experimental design was 89%. Our first trial plated 90 % at the same amperage level (0.8 amps). From this, we believe that the brightener had no effect on the percentage of copper plated. These results were good because it meant that we were not testing two variables. We also analyzed the quality of the copper plated. After looking at each result, we determined that there was no relationship between the amperage level and the quality of the copper. At 1.0 amps the appearance was most appealing. At 1.5 amps, the quality was least visually appealing. At 0.3 amps, the quality was third best. Therefore there is no direct or indirect correlation between amperage and quality. Bibliography

(1) J. Hill, Chemistry For Changing Times. (MacMillian Publishing Company, New York, 1992), : 237-240. (2) L. Fruen, The Real World of Chemistry. (Kendall Hunt, Dubuque, IA, ed. 6, 2002), : 252-264.

(3) T. Taylor, Solid State Technology [online]. Vol 41, p. NA (1998). Available from Gale Resources Info Trac
webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear 3/4

11/14/2010

Electroplating Plastics

http://web6.infortrac.galegroup.com/itw/infomark/827/770/34695294w6/purl=rc1ITOF_O_A53477830&dyn=19lar_fmt? sw_aep=mnbreckhs. Accessed 2003 Apr. 16.

(4) Interview with Ms. Gilbert. 15 Apr. 2003.

(5) J. Stock, Electrochemistry, Past and Present. (ACS Symposium Series, Washington D.C, 1989), : 480.

(6) R. Smith, Chemistry For the Million. (Charles Scribners Sons, New York, 1972), : 94- 95.

(7) Astro Electroplating (2001); see http://www.astroelectroplating.com /neo_page_6.htm.

(8) R. Weil, Electroplating of Metals [online]. (2000) Available from Access Science @ McGraw-Hill http://www.accessscience.com/serverjava/arknoid/science/ASAenclclopedia/2/2/est_226500_printable.htm. Accessed 2003 Apr. 16.

webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear

4/4