Aluminium binding energy

Fig. 5.17 The binding energy per atom U as a function of the coordination number for aluminium. The crosses correspond to LDA predictions, whereas the curve is a least-squares fit of the form of eqn (5.72). The lattice types considered are the linear chain ( = 2), graphite ( = 3), diamond ( = 4), two-dimensional square mesh ( = 4), square bilayer ( = 5), simple cubic (x = 6), triangular mesh (x - 6), vacancy lattice (x — 8) and face centred cubic (x = 12). (After Heine eta/. (1991).)...

Table 6.3 Contributions to the binding energy (in Ry per atom) of sodium, magnesium, and aluminium within the second order real-space representation, eqn (6.73), using Ashcroft empty-core pseudopotentials. L/gf is defined by eqn (6.75). The numbers in brackets correspond to the simple expression, eqn (6.77), for = 0) and to the experimental values of the binding energy and negative cohesive energy respectively.

Some of the catalyst samples prepared were characterized by EPR and XPS. EPR spectra were recorded at 20 and -196°C using a JE0L JES-FE3X spectrometer. XPS measurements were taken by using a VG ESCA 3 spectrometer with an aluminium radiation source. All binding energies were referred to the A12p line (BE = 74.7 eV). 

Fig. 4.7. Aluminium content of sputter deposited ZnO Al films. A target with a nominal A1 content of 2wt% has been used. The shadowed regions indicate the general behavior. The atomic concentration is calculated with and without considering the high binding energy oxygen species, which contributes to the O Is signal (see Sect. 4.2.2.2)...

Core-electron binding energy shifts in aluminium... 

Core-Electron Binding Energy Shifts in Aluminium... 

XPS analysis was performed with an SSX-100 model photoelectron spectrometer (FISONS) using monochromatized aluminium anode. The binding energy (BE) values were calculated with respect to Cls (BE of C-CH... 

First, we show an XPS analysis of the P(VDF-TrFE)/Al interfaee, in top electrode geometry. Figure 21.5 shows an XPS spectrum of a P(VDF-TrFE) film after evaporation of a thin aluminium layer (around 1 nm). Compared to the spectrum of the bulk P(VDF-TrFE) film without aluminium, we find the following modifications (i) the relative intensity between CH2 and CF2 peaks is modified towards lower fluorine content, approximately from CH2/CF2 = 0.8 before and CH2/CF2 = 1.0 after evaporation (ii) a small shift of CH2, CFH and CF2 and (iii) a new peak at lower binding energies. This is a clear indication of a surface reaction. 

Aluminium Hydrides.—PNO-CI (pair natural orbital/configuration interaction) and CEPA-PNO (coupled electron pair approximation with pair natural orbitals) MO calculations on AIH3 give a binding energy (referred to A1 + 3H) of ca. 205 kcal mor. °... 

The binding energies were calculated taking as reference the C-(C,H) component of the C Is adventitious carbon peak fixed at 284.8 eV. The analyses of palladium, chlorine and aluminium were based on the following photopeaks Pd 3d, A12p and Cl 2p. 

X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analyses were performed using a Riber SIA 200 spectrometer (Riber, Rueil Malmaison, France) using an aluminium (A1 Ka = 1487 eV) X-ray source. Cls peak at a binding energy of 285.0 eV was used as an internal standard. 

Vetrivel, Catlow and Colbourn. A small cluster treated explicitly by ab initio molecular orbital methods was embedded in an 82-ion point ion block chosen so that the Madelung potential and electric field reproduced those from static lattice calculations. The effect of aluminium substitution on the proton binding energy was determined, and found to be stronger than when Al was present in the framework. 

---