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.
The sticking probability for on some transition metals at a hydrogen pressure of
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.2825296
/content/aip/journal/jcp/128/3/10.1063/1.2825296
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/128/3/10.1063/1.2825296

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

The principles of the high pressure experiment. The left figure shows the gas sampling device positioned over a sample with metal spots. The right part of the figure shows a section of the gas sampling device. The distance between the tip of the capillary, where the leak is situated, and the sample surface, , is , as is the distance between the nozzle and the sample surface, .

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

The calculated partial pressures of , HD, and at the capillary leak as a function of the sticking probability at 40 (solid curves) and (dashed curves). The gas mixture consists of 1% in at total pressure and the flow rate is . The capillary-surface distance and the nozzle-surface distance are both . The diameter of the metal spot is .

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Measured values for (a) and (b) over the center of spots made of the different metals. The gas mixture consisted of 1% in , i.e., the inlet partial pressure of is . The total pressure was , and the flow rate . For comparison, data for Ni, Pd, and Pt taken from Ref. 13 are included in the figure.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Calculated sticking probabilities for Co, Ni, Rh, Ru, Pd, Ir, and Pt in the temperature range . The dotted line marks the lower detection limit for . The signal for Cu is below the detection limit. The data for Ni, Pd, and Pt were taken from Ref. 13.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Arrhenius plots of . The plot for Pd is divided in one part below , , and one part above , (Ref. 13). The data for Ni, Pd, and Pt were taken from Ref. 13.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Reported values for the sticking probability at high coverage and measured values for at . In the UHV experiments, adsorption was done with the gas at room temperature and the surface at the temperature . The maximum coverage is 1 if nothing else is stated. (1) Ni(111), , (Ref. 26). (2) Ni(111), sputtered, (Ref. 11). (3) Polycrystalline Co, , (Ref. 19). (4) , , (Ref. 20). (5) Polycrystalline Co, , (Ref. 27). (6) Co(0001), , (Ref. 21). (7) Ir(111), , (Ref. 28). (8) Pd(100), , (Ref. 29). (9) Pd(111), , approximate, see Table II. (10) Pt(997), , (Ref. 30). (11) Pt(111), , (Ref. 30). (12) Rh(110), , , (Ref. 31). (13) Rh(111), , (Ref. 32). (14) Rh(111), , (Ref. 12). (15) , , , (Ref. 25). (16) Ru(0001), , (Ref. 33). (17) Ru(0001), , (Ref. 22).

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Published values for the desorption energy , the isosteric heat of adsorption , the calculated adsorption energy , and the apparent desorption energy derived as part of this study. is shown both for the functionals PW91 and RPBE (Ref. 45). The maximum coverage is 1 if nothing else is stated. (1) , Pt(110) (Ref. 28). (2) , Pt(111) terraces (Ref. 7). (3) , Pt(111) (Ref. 6). (4) , Pt(997) (Ref. 30). (5) , , Pt(111) (Ref. 5). (6) , Pt(111), (Ref. 5). (7) , Pt(997), (Ref. 30). (8) , Ir(100) (Ref. 46). (9) , Ir(100) (Ref. 8). (10) , Ir(111) (Ref. 28). (11) , Ir(110) (Ref. 10). (12) Ir(111), (Ref. 28). (13) , Ir(111) (Ref. 47). (14) , Ir(110), (Ref. 10). (15) , Rh(100) (Ref. 48). (16) , Rh(110) (Ref. 31). (17) , Rh(111) (Ref. 12). (18) , FEM tip (Ref. 49). (19) , Rh(111) (Ref. 32). (20) , Rh(110), , (Ref. 31). (21) , Rh(111), (Ref. 32). (22) , Pd(100) (Ref. 29). (23) , Pd(110) (Ref. 34). (24) , Pd(111) (Ref. 9). (25) , Pd(111) (Ref. 34). (26) , Pd(111), (Ref. 9). (27) , Pd(100), (Ref. 29). (28) , evaporated film (Ref. 19). (29) , (Ref. 20). (30) , Co(0001) (Ref. 21). (31) , evaporated film, (Ref. 19). (32) , Ni(111) (Ref. 26). (33) , Ni(111) (Ref. 4). (34) , Ni(100), Ni(110) (Ref. 4). (35) , Ni(111) (Ref. 11). (36) , Ni(111), (Ref. 11). (37) , Ru(0001) (Ref. 23). (38) , Ru(0001) (Ref. 24). (39) , , (Ref. 25). (40) , Ru(0001) (Ref. 22). (41) , Ru(0001), (Ref. 24). (42) , , , (Ref. 25).

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

The sticking probability at as a function of the adsorption energy calculated for 0.25 ML H with the functional RPBE taken from Ref. 45.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

Average values and standard deviations for and . The table also contains values for calculated from with Eq. (14) under the assumption that the site density is equal to the atomic density of the close-packed surface and that . For comparison, data for Ni, Pd, and Pt taken from Ref. 13 are included in the table. is the number of measurements used to calculate and .

Generic image for table
Table II.

Comments to Fig. 6.

Generic image for table
Table III.

Comments to Fig. 7.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jcp/128/3/10.1063/1.2825296
2008-01-16
2014-04-17
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: The sticking probability for H2 on some transition metals at a hydrogen pressure of 1bar
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/128/3/10.1063/1.2825296
10.1063/1.2825296
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM