1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Photoinduced evaporation of mass-selected clusters
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.2738945
/content/aip/journal/jcp/126/22/10.1063/1.2738945
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/126/22/10.1063/1.2738945

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

The schematic diagram of a linear tandem time-of-flight mass spectrometer employed for the photofragmentation studies.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

The time-of-flight mass spectra for (a) and (b) clusters produced by two-photon ionization at . The inset shows a full mass distribution for clusters.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Dissociation ratio of clusters as a function of , where and are the ion intensities of daughter and parent ions, respectively. The inset shows the decay time of clusters as a function of .

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

(Color online) The optimized structures for the most stable isomers of clusters.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

The difference photofragmentation mass spectra (laser on–laser off) for at various photon energies. At all photon energies, the mass peak corresponding to ion, which is a product of the decomposition of aniline ring, is not detected.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

The average number of water molecules ejected as a function of photon energy for . The inverse of the slope gives the average binding of water molecules. The inset shows the linear response of the fragment ion intensity to the laser fluence at .

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

The average number of water molecules ejected as a function of photon energy for clusters. For , bound water molecules run out as photon energy increases. For , the plots are quite linear.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

The difference photofragmentation mass spectra (laser on–laser off) for at . The inset shows the average number of water molecules ejected as a function of cluster size at three photon energies.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

The average binding energy of water molecules for vs cluster size. The inset shows that the relative internal energy decreases with cluster size .

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

The branching ratios of photofragments vs photon energy for (a) and (b) . All the plots for each fragment ions fit the Gaussian function.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

DFT-calculated absolute energy of .

Generic image for table
Table II.

DFT-calculated binding energy of and .

Generic image for table
Table III.

Average number of ejected solvent molecules for and at three different wavelengths.

Generic image for table
Table IV.

Average number of survived water molecules after photofragmentation for .

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jcp/126/22/10.1063/1.2738945
2007-06-11
2014-04-24
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Photoinduced evaporation of mass-selected aniline+(water)n(n=4–20) clusters
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/126/22/10.1063/1.2738945
10.1063/1.2738945
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM