Advertisement

Mercury Adsorption on Ni(111)

  • N. K. Singh
  • R. G. Jones
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Series in Surface Sciences book series (SSSUR, volume 11)

Abstract

Mercury is an ideal adsorbate with which to study the relationship between surface structure, surface electronic structure and surface thermodynamics. It is metallic, has an easily manageable mono-atomic vapour at room temperature, and forms a weak chemisorption bond with many metal surfaces such as Fe (100), [1], W (100), [2,3], Ni(l00), [4], Cu(100), [5] and a particularly weak bond with Ag(100), [6,7]. This enables equilibrium adsorption isotherms [1,3,4] to be measured at moderate temperatures (100-200°C), from which surface thermodynamic quantities may be determined. Mercury therefore bridges the gap between the detailed thermodynamic studies of noble gas physisorption on transition metals, and the structural and electronic studies of metal on metal systems, where the use of metal evaporation sources and the strong chemisorption bond involved, preclude the measurement of equilibrium adsorption isotherms. In this paper the relationship between the surface structure and the isosteric heat of adsorption (qst) is discussed for mercury adsorbed on Ni(111).

Keywords

Isosteric Heat Mercury Atom Equilibrium Adsorption Isotherm R300 Structure Work Function Change 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R.G. Jones and D.L. Perry Vacuum 31, (1981), 493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    W.F. Egelhoff, D.L. Perry and J.W. Linnett Surface Sci. 54, (1976), 670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.G. Jones and D.L. Perry Surface Sci. 71, (1978), 59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    R.G. Jones and A.W.-L. Tong Surface Sci. acceptedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Onellion, Y.J. Kime, P.A. Dowben and N. Tache J.Phys.C submittedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Onellion, J.L. Erskine, Y.J. Kime, S. Varma and P.A. Dowben Phys.Rev.B 33, (1986), 8833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Varma, Y.J. Kime, P.A. Dowben, M. Onellion and J.L. Erskine Phys. Lett. A 116, (1986), 66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    P.M. Williams, P. Butcher and J. Wood Phys. Rev. B 14, (1976), 3215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. McDonnel, B.D. Powell and D.P. Woodruff Surface Sci. 40, (1973), 669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    N.K. Singh and R.G. Jones in preparationGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Donohue, The Structure of the elements John Wiley & Sons, 1974Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Smoluchowski Phys. Rev. 60 (1941) 661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    In general the p(2×2) structure misght also consist of 3 domains of (2×1) structure. This possibility is excluded when the size of the Hg atom (3DǺ) is compared to the nearest neighbour distance for a (2×1) (2.49Ǻ).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. K. Singh
    • 1
  • R. G. Jones
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations