Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T23:19:32.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kinetics of subsurface hydrogen adsorbed on niobium: Thermal desorption studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

A. L. Cabrera ,
J. Espinosa-Gangas ,
Johan Jonsson-Akerman  and
Ivan K. Schuller
A. L. Cabrera
Affiliation:
Facultad de Fisica, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Casilla 306, Santiago 22, Chile
J. Espinosa-Gangas
Affiliation:
Facultad de Fisica, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Casilla 306, Santiago 22, Chile
Johan Jonsson-Akerman
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093–0319
Ivan K. Schuller
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093–0319
Get access

Abstract

The adsorption/absorption of hydrogen and the adsorption of carbon monoxide by niobium foils, at room temperature, was studied using thermal desorption spectroscopy. Two hydrogen desorption peaks were observed with a maximum at 404 and 471 K. The first hydrogen desorption peak is regarded as hydrogen desorbing from surface sites while the second peak, which represents desorption from surface sites stronger bound to the surface, also has a component—due to its tailing to higher temperatures—of hydrogen diffusing from subsurface sites. Carbon monoxide adsorption was used to determine the number of surface sites, since it does not penetrate below the surface. Two carbon monoxide desorption peaks are observed in these experiments: at 425 and 608 K. The first peak is regarded as the adsorption of molecular carbon monoxide, and the second, as carbon monoxide dissociated on the niobium surface. The crystallographic orientation of the foils was determined by x-ray diffraction and showed a preferential (110) orientation of the untreated foil due to the effect of cold rolling. This preferential orientation decreased after hydrogen/heat treatment, appearing strong also in the (200) and (211) orientations. This change in texture of the foils is mainly due to the effect of heat treatment and not to hydrogen adsorption/desorption cycling. The kinetics of hydrogen and CO desorption is compared with that of Pd and Pd alloys.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 17 , Issue 10 , October 2002 , pp. 2698 - 2704
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Gryaznov, V.M., Vestn. Adad. Nauk SSSR 21 (1986).Google Scholar
2.Gryaznov, V.M., Platinum Met. Rev. 30, 68 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Shu, J., Grandjean, B.P.A., Neste, A. Van, and Kaliaguine, S., Can. J. Chem. Eng. 69, 1036 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Klose, F., Rehm, Ch., Nagengast, D., Maletta, H., and Weidinger, A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1150 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Rehm, Ch., Fritzsche, H., Maletta, H., and Klose, F., Phys. Rev. B 59, 3142 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Volkl, J. and Alefeld, G., in Topics in Applied Physics: Hydrogen in Metals, edited by Alefeld, G. and Volkl, J. (Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1978).Google Scholar
7.Pryde, J.A. and Titcomb, C.G., Solid State Phys. 238, 1293 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Pryde, J.A. and Titcomb, C.G., Solid State Phys. 238, 1301 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Pick, M.A., Davenport, J.W., Strongin, M., and Dienes, G.J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 286 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Pick, M.A., Phys. Rev. B 24, 4287 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Reisfeld, G., Jisrawi, N.M., Ruckman, M.W., and Strongin, M., Phys. Rev. B 53, 4974 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Rieder, K.H., Baumberger, M., and Stocker, W., Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1799 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Hove, M.A. Van and Hermann, K., Surface Architecture and Latuse, a PC-based program, Version 2.0 and later Versions (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, 1988).Google Scholar
14.Lagos, M., Surf. Sci. Lett. 122, L601 (1982).Google Scholar
15.Lagos, M. and Schuller, I.K., Surf. Sci. 138, L161 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Lagos, M., Martinez, G., and Schuller, I.K., Phys. Rev. B 29, 5979 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Romero, A., Schuller, I.K., and Ramirez, R., Phys. Rev. B 58, 15904 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Li, Y., Erskine, J.L., and Diebold, A.C., Phys. Rev. B 34, 5951 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Rieder, K.H. and Stocker, W., Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 2548 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Cabrera, A.L., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 8, 3229 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Cabrera, A.L., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 11, 205 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Cabrera, A.L., Morales, E., Hansen, J., and Schuller, I.K., Appl. Phys. Lett. 66, 1216 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Conrad, H., Ertl, G., and Latta, E.E., Surf. Sci. 41, 435 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Behm, R.J., Christmann, K., and Ertl, G., Surf. Sci. 99, 320 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Cattania, M.G., Penka, V., Behm, R.J., Christmann, K., and Ertl, G., Surf. Sci. 126, 382 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Nyberg, C., Westerlund, L., Jonsson, L., and Andersson, S., J. Electron Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 54/55, 639 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.He, J-W. and Norton, P.R., Surf. Sci. 195, L199 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Lynch, J.F. and Flanagan, T.B., J. Phys. Chem. 77, 2628 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Behm, R.J., Penka, V., Cattania, M.G., Christmann, K., and Ertl, G., J. Chem. Phys. 78, 7486 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Gdowski, G.E., Felter, T.E., and Stulen, R.H., Surf, Sci. 181, L147 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Auer, W. and Grabke, H.J., Ber. Bunsen-Ges Phys. Chem. 78, 58 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Kay, B.D., Peden, C.H.F., and Goodman, D.W., Phys. Rev. B 34, 817 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Behm, R.J., Christmann, K., Ertl, G., Hove, M.A. Van, Thiel, P.A., and Weinberg, W.H., Surg. Sci. 88, L59 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Behm, R.J., Christmann, K., Ertl, G., and Hove, M.A. Van, J. Chem. Phys. 73, 2984 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35.Noordermeer, A., Kok, G.A., and Niuwenhuys, B.E., Surf. Sci. 165, 375 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36.Cabrera, A.L., Morales, E., Altamirano, L., and Espinoza, P., Rev. Mex. Fis. 39, 932 (1993).Google Scholar
37.Cabrera, A.L., Morales, E., and Armor, J.N., J. Mater. Res. 10, 779 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38.Nakamura, J., Toyoshima, I., and Tanaka, K., Surf. Sci. 201, 185–194 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39.Cabrera, A.L., Garrido, W.H., and Volkmann, U.G., Catal. Lett. 25, 115 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40.Burke, M.L. and Madix, R.J., Surf. Sci. 273, 20–34 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41.Erley, W. and Wagner, H., Surf. Sci. 74, 333–341 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42.Redhead, P.A., Vacuum 12, 203 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43.King, D.A., Surf. Sci. 47, 384 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44.Menzel, D., Chem. Phys. Solid Surf. 20, 389 (1972).Google Scholar