Kevin Schweinar1, Sebastian Beeg2, Caroline Hartwig2, Catherine R Rajamathi2, Olga Kasian3,4, Simone Piccinin5, Mauricio J Prieto6,7, Liviu C Tanase6,7, Daniel M Gottlob7, Thomas Schmidt6,7, Dierk Raabe1, Robert Schlögl2,8, Baptiste Gault1,9, Travis E Jones8, Mark T Greiner2. 1. Department of Microstructure Physics and Alloy Design, Max-Planck-Institut für Eisenforschung GmbH, Max-Planck-Str. 1, 40237 Düsseldorf, Germany. 2. Department of Heterogeneous Reactions, Max-Planck Institute for Chemical Energy Conversion, Stiftstrasse 34-36, 45470 Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany. 3. Department of Interface Chemistry and Surface Engineering, Max-Planck-Institut für Eisenforschung GmbH, Max-Planck-Str. 1, 40237 Düsseldorf, Germany. 4. Helmholtz Zentrum Berlin für Materialien und Energie, Albert-Einstein-Str. 15, 14109 Berlin, Germany. 5. CNR-IOM DEMOCRITOS, Istituto Officina dei Materiali, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Via Bonomea 265, 34136 Trieste, Italy. 6. Fritz-Haber-Institute of the Max-Planck Society, Department of Interface Science, Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin, Germany. 7. Fritz-Haber-Institute of the Max-Planck Society, Department of Chemical Physics, Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin, Germany. 8. Department of Inorganic Chemistry, Fritz-Haber Institute of the Max-Planck Society, Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin, Germany. 9. Department of Materials, Imperial College London, Royal School of Mines, London SW7 2AZ, U.K.
Abstract
Metal alloy catalysts can develop complex surface structures when exposed to reactive atmospheres. The structures of the resulting surfaces have intricate relationships with a myriad of factors, such as the affinity of the individual alloying elements to the components of the gas atmosphere and the bond strengths of the multitude of low-energy surface compounds that can be formed. Identifying the atomic structure of such surfaces is a prerequisite for establishing structure-property relationships, as well as for modeling such catalysts in ab initio calculations. Here, we show that an alloy, consisting of an oxophilic metal (Cu) diluted into a noble metal (Ag), forms a meta-stable two-dimensional oxide monolayer, when the alloy is subjected to oxidative reaction conditions. The presence of this oxide is correlated with selectivity in the corresponding test reaction of ethylene epoxidation. In the present study, using a combination of in situ, ex situ, and theoretical methods (NAP-XPS, XPEEM, LEED, and DFT), we determine the structure to be a two-dimensional analogue of Cu2O, resembling a single lattice plane of Cu2O. The overlayer holds a pseudo-epitaxial relationship with the underlying noble metal. Spectroscopic evidence shows that the oxide's electronic structure is qualitatively distinct from its three-dimensional counterpart, and because of weak electronic coupling with the underlying noble metal, it exhibits metallic properties. These findings provide precise details of this peculiar structure and valuable insights into how alloying can enhance catalytic properties.
Metal alloy catalysts can develop complex surface structures when exposed to reactive atmospheres. The structures of the resulting surfaces have intricate relationships with a myriad of factors, such as the affinity of the individual alloying elements to the components of the gas atmosphere and the bond strengths of the multitude of low-energy surface compounds that can be formed. Identifying the atomic structure of such surfaces is a prerequisite for establishing structure-property relationships, as well as for modeling such catalysts in ab initio calculations. Here, we show that an alloy, consisting of an oxophilic metal (Cu) diluted into a noble metal (Ag), forms a meta-stable two-dimensional oxide monolayer, when the alloy is subjected to oxidative reaction conditions. The presence of this oxide is correlated with selectivity in the corresponding test reaction of ethylene epoxidation. In the present study, using a combination of in situ, ex situ, and theoretical methods (NAP-XPS, XPEEM, LEED, and DFT), we determine the structure to be a two-dimensional analogue of Cu2O, resembling a single lattice plane of Cu2O. The overlayer holds a pseudo-epitaxial relationship with the underlying noble metal. Spectroscopic evidence shows that the oxide's electronic structure is qualitatively distinct from its three-dimensional counterpart, and because of weak electronic coupling with the underlying noble metal, it exhibits metallic properties. These findings provide precise details of this peculiar structure and valuable insights into how alloying can enhance catalytic properties.
One major difficulty in
contemporary catalysis research is bridging the so-called “complexity
gap”. The complexity gap refers to the fact that catalysts
used in applications of interest are much more complex entities than
the model systems for which we are able to obtain precise atomic-scale
detail in fundamental studies. For instance, subjecting a material
to the conditions of industrial catalysts can give rise to the formation
of a multitude of chemical phases, any of which could potentially
play a role in catalysis, but remain unknown to us from model investigations.
In order to accurately model catalysts in reactive conditions—for
instance, to calculate adsorption energies and reaction barriers for
use in micro-kinetic simulations—we require accurate knowledge
of surface structures present in reaction conditions.Much progress
has been made in recent years to bridge the complexity gap, with the
development of numerous in situ characterization methods. Unfortunately,
it is often the case that one must sacrifice precision for in situ
measurements. For instance, commonly used near-ambient pressure X-ray
photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) setups probe tens to hundreds of
square microns of the sample surface to maximize the signal-to-noise
ratio. However, the collected signal reflects an average of the probed
area, which in turn prevents the spatial differentiation and unequivocal
identification of localized phases. Consequently, one is often left
with uncertain and ambiguous information about one’s sample.
In the present work, we bridge part of the complexity gap by combining
several in situ, ex situ, and theoretical methods to identify a unique
structure that forms on an alloy in a reactive gas atmosphere.Metal alloys hold potential for developing novel catalysts. Under
reaction conditions, synergies can arise between alloying elements
to result in improved catalytic properties compared to the pure constituent
metals. Heating an alloy in a reactive gas atmosphere can result in
surface restructuring, phase segregation, preferential oxidation,
and the formation of unique surface-adsorbate superstructures. Much
theoretical effort has been devoted to predicting which alloy compositions
exhibit enhanced catalytic properties;[1,2] however, without
knowledge of the structures formed when exposing an alloy to reaction
conditions, one is likely to overlook some important aspects.A common strategy for predicting surface structures in reactive
atmospheres is to propose candidate structures and use ab-initio thermodynamics
to calculate their stabilities in a given atmosphere.[3] The greatest difficulty here is choosing the candidate
structures because the configurational space of all possible structures
is far too large to test them all. Typical approaches for choosing
candidate structures include a “chemical intuition”,
where one selects structural motifs known to exist from X-ray diffraction
data or ultra-high vacuum surface science studies. Another approach
is to generate candidate structures using genetic algorithms. In any
case, there is no guarantee that the true surface structure was among
the candidate structures tested, and experimental verification is
the only way to determine which structures actually form, making such
data extremely valuable for reaction pathway calculations.Here,
we take a closer look at a bimetallic alloy, consisting of
an oxophilic metal (Cu) and a noble metal (Ag). In particular, we
assess the (electronic) structure of the surface oxide that forms,
when the alloy is exposed to an oxygen-containing reaction atmosphere.
Previous reports have shown that the oxophilic element diffuses to
the surface to form an unknown oxidic surface structure that is correlated
with selectivity for the epoxidation reaction.[4−6] In this contribution,
we employ a suite of in situ techniques, with pressures ranging from
10–1 to 10–5 mbar. We show how
it is possible to bridge part of the complexity gap by linking several datasets through shared attributes. The approach
involves (1) characterizing spectroscopic properties using near-ambient
pressure XPS (NAP-XPS) and near edge X-ray absorption fine structure
(NEXAFS) measurements; (2) identifying spectroscopic fingerprints
that are correlated with epoxide selectivity; (3) characterizing the
structure by means of X-ray photoemission electron microscopy (XPEEM)
and low-energy electron diffraction (LEED), and verifying that the
spectroscopic fingerprints observed under in situ NAP conditions,
are also observed under XPEEM conditions; and (4) comparing the measured
structural and spectroscopic data with simulated data from the candidate
structures.Using this approach, we determine the previously
found mystery
phase as a two-dimensional meta-stable Cu-oxide, structurally analogous
to a single lattice plane of Cu2O, as depicted in Figure . Our findings provide
valuable insights into the kinds of structures that can form on alloy
catalysts.
Figure 1
Rendition of the CuO structure formed on AgCu in oxidizing environments.
Rendition of the CuO structure formed on AgCu in oxidizing environments.
Materials
and Methods
Experimental Section
Environmental
scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) experiments were performed in
a FEI Quanta 200 FEG, using a differentially pumped lens column and
a gaseous secondary electron detector. Gases were continually flowed
into the chamber via mass flow controllers to a pressure of 0.3 mbar.
Sample heating was accomplished through an infrared laser fed into
the chamber via a fiber-optics feed-through.In situ NAP-XPS
measurements were performed at the ISISS beamline at the synchrotron
radiation facility BESSY II of the Helmholtz–Zentrum Berlin
(HZB), using a differentially pumped Phoibos 150 hemispherical analyzer
from Specs GmbH. The ISISS beamline is a dipole photon source, with
a plane-grating monochromator, delivering 6 × 1010 photons/s/0.1 A and an energy resolution of >15 000 at
400
eV. NAP-XPS experiments were performed in a gas pressure of 0.3 mbar.
Ethylene epoxidation conditions utilized a 1:1 mixture of O2/C2H4 with a total flow rate of 6 mL/min. Sample
heating up to 250 °C was accomplished by illuminating the backside
of the sample pellets with an infrared laser. The sample pellets were
prepared following the procedure reported in ref (4). This experiment yields
nonspatially resolved XPS (Cu 2p, O 1s, Ag 3d), NEXAFS (O K, Cu L),
and valence band spectra under conditions where ethylene epoxide is
formed.Low-energy electron microscopy (LEEM)/LEED and XPEEM
measurements
were carried out in the SMART spectro-microscope operating at the
UE49-PGM beamline at the synchrotron radiation facility BESSY II of
the HZB. The aberration-corrected and energy-filtered LEEM/PEEM instrument
combines microscopy, diffraction, and spectroscopy techniques for
comprehensive characterization. The instrument achieves an experimentally
demonstrated lateral resolution of 2.6 nm in LEEM and 18 nm in energy-filtered
XPEEM mode, respectively.[7,8]We used a polycrystalline
AgCu diffusion couple for our first experiment.
The sample was prepared by fusing together a piece of high purity
silver and copper. This couple was then annealed in Ar for 21 h at
750 °C before it was cut and mechanically ion polished. A single
crystalline AgCu(111) surface was used for the second XPEEM experiment.The AgCu(111) crystal was prepared by depositing a copper thin
film of 50 nm thickness onto a Ag(111) crystal by physical vapor deposition.
The crystal was then annealed in H2 inside a lab-source
NAP-XPS system at temperatures from 100 to 630 °C while monitoring
the Cu 2p signal (see Supporting Information S.1) and then annealed in H2 at 550 °C for additional
4 h. The annealing procedure leads to Cu reduction and diffusion into
the Ag(111) crystal.The single crystal was transported in air
from Mülheim an
der Ruhr, Germany, to Berlin, Germany, one day after the annealing
treatment. After loading the sample into the XPEEM microscope at the
SMART beamline, the sample was sputtered with Ar+ (1.5
keV ion energy, 0.06 μA flux, for 15 min) and annealed in UHV
(3 × 10–9 mbar) for 5 min at 400 °C. Following
this procedure, the surface of the sample was crystalline, but too
rough for high-resolution imaging (see Supporting Information S.2-A). The sputter-annealing treatment was repeated
23 times until a contaminant-free and smooth surface was obtained
(see S.2-B). The surface was then reduced by heating to 400 °C
in 1 × 10–5 mbar H2 for 10 min.
This resulted in a clean surface, free of oxidized copper species.
The oxidation of the alloy was performed in 1 × 10–5 mbar O2 at 300 °C. These experiments yield spatially
resolved XPS (O 1s, Cu 2p, Ag 3d), valence band spectra, microscopy
images, and LEED patterns.NAP-XPS measurements on the AgCu(111)
single crystal were performed
under identical conditions as the XPEEM experiments, prepared as described
above. The measurements were carried out at the BelChem beamline of
the synchrotron radiation facility BESSY II of the HZB, using a differentially
pumped Phoibos 150 hemispherical analyzer from Specs GmbH. The results
from this method provide high quality and energy calibrated non-spatially
resolved XPS (Cu 2p, O 1s, Ag 3d), Auger spectra (Cu LMM), NEXAFS
(O K, Cu L), and valence band spectra.The density functional
theory (DFT) calculations were performed
using the Heyd–Scuseria–Ernzerhof HSE06 exchange and
correlation functional.[9] We used optimized
norm-conserving Vanderbilt (ONCV), with a plane wave cutoff of 60
Ry. The surface oxides were formed on top of a Ag(111) surface, modelled
using a 4-layer slab, sampling the Brillouin zone with K-point grids equivalent to a 12 × 12 × 1 on the 1 ×
1 surface unit cell and broadening the Fermi surface using the Marzari–Vanderbilt
scheme with a 0.04 Ry smearing energy. During the structural optimizations,
the bottom two layers of the Ag slabs were kept fixed to bulk atomic
positions. The starting geometries were taken from the work of Piccinin
et al.[10] and further optimized, until forces
were smaller than 0.026 eV/Å. All the calculations were performed
with the Quantum ESPRESSO code.[11] The DFT
calculations provide candidate structures, their energies, the density
of states (DOS), and symmetry.Each type of experiment provides
a set of useful attributes that
can be utilized to link the experiments together. A connectivity graph
of the various kinds of data is provided in the Supporting Information (S.3). While the valence band, for
instance, is an attribute that all experiments have in common, that
is, that could be measured or calculated in every experiment, XPEEM,
DFT, and NAP-XPS on the single crystal share the same experimental
conditions. Figure S3H shows the complete
connectivity graph in which the line thickness represents the number
of links that exists between the different experiments. By networking
commonly observed data sets among different experiments, drawing a
link between atomic structure of the investigated surface oxide and
its function becomes possible.
Data
Analysis
Spectromicroscopy stacks
were generally measured by (1) choosing a fixed photon energy, (2)
setting the microscope lens settings such that the surface image plane
is focused on the 2D detector, (3) band-pass filtering the photoelectrons
by kinetic energy, and (4) scanning the sample potential at fixed
filter settings, while measuring the resulting 2D detector image.
The result of this measurement is a stack of detector images, where
each image represents the spatial distribution of photoelectrons having
a given binding energy, as defined by the sample potential referring
to the fixed band center used for the energy filter in the given image.
An alternative way to view the data is a 2D array of photoemission
spectra. The (uncropped) image size is 1600 × 1200 pixels, so
that there are 1.92 × 106 photoemission spectra in
a dataset. The detector pixels were binned to make images of 400 ×
300 pixels. To identify how many chemical components were present
in the image stack, we performed principle component analysis (PCA)
and determined how many abstract factors were significant in relation
to the image noise. After this procedure, we imaged regions appearing
to be phase pure and generated basis vectors by summing the spectra
in these homogeneous regions. These basis vectors were then used to
fit the original 120 000 spectra using linear least-squares
regression, to give the result of a spatial map of the chosen basis
vectors. Such maps are shown in Figures c,d, 4c,d, and 5a.
Figure 3
(a) LEEM
image showing the coexistence of Cu2O (A) and
CuO (B)
on a polycrystalline AgCu sample (Ekin = 4.8 eV). (b) Valence band spectra (hν =
170) of regions A and B. (c,d) Spatial distributions of Cu2O and CuO valence spectra, as determined from a XPEEM image stack.
Figure 4
(a) LEEM image of a surface partially covered by CuO (region A), Ekin = 5 eV. The insets show the corresponding
LEED patterns at Ekin = 42 eV. (b) Valence
spectra from regions A and B in (hν = 170 eV).
(c,d) Spatial distributions of AgCu and CuO valence spectra, as determined from
a XPEEM image stack.
Figure 5
Comparison of the pristine
(left column) and oxidized (right column)
AgCu(111) surface. (a–c) LEEM image (Ekin = 42 eV), LEED pattern (Ekin = 42 eV), and (d–f) valence spectra at photon energies close
to the Cooper minimum of Ag 4d.
ESEM images
of (A) a reduced AgCu foil (0.5 at. % Cu) and (B) the
same foil while heated in 0.3 mbar ethylene and oxygen at 300 °C.
(C) In situ NAP-XPS valence spectra (hν = 150
eV) measured as a time series under epoxidation conditions (time step
= 50 min, 0.3 mbar, 1:1 O2/C2H4,
300 C). (D) Comparison of a difference spectrum generated (see Supporting Information for details) with a reference
spectrum of Cu2O. (E) Comparison of several in situ measurements,
using a Phoibos NAP-150 analyzer (i–iii) with a measurement
performed in ultra-high-vacuum, using an XPEEM analyzer (iv). Spectra
i and ii are measured in 0.5 mbar of a 1:1 mixture of ethylene and
oxygen. Spectrum (iii) is measured in 0.5 mbar of a dilute–O2 mixture containing 1:50 mixture of oxygen to ethylene. Spectrum
(iv) is measured on a AgCu(111) single crystal at 300 °C in 1
× 10–5 mbar O2.(a) LEEM
image showing the coexistence of Cu2O (A) and
CuO (B)
on a polycrystalline AgCu sample (Ekin = 4.8 eV). (b) Valence band spectra (hν =
170) of regions A and B. (c,d) Spatial distributions of Cu2O and CuO valence spectra, as determined from a XPEEM image stack.(a) LEEM image of a surface partially covered by CuO (region A), Ekin = 5 eV. The insets show the corresponding
LEED patterns at Ekin = 42 eV. (b) Valence
spectra from regions A and B in (hν = 170 eV).
(c,d) Spatial distributions of AgCu and CuO valence spectra, as determined from
a XPEEM image stack.Comparison of the pristine
(left column) and oxidized (right column)
AgCu(111) surface. (a–c) LEEM image (Ekin = 42 eV), LEED pattern (Ekin = 42 eV), and (d–f) valence spectra at photon energies close
to the Cooper minimum of Ag 4d.The XPS spectra were measured using the XPEEM instrument (SMART
spectro-microscope) at the UE49-PGM beamline. They were measured by
(1) choosing a photon energy, (2) in the LEEM mode, moving the sample
such that the field-of-view is homogeneously covered by a single phase,
and (3) setting the lenses such that the energy-dispersive plane is
imaged onto the 2D detector. The resulting detector image represents
binding energy (kinetic energy) along one direction and spatial dispersion
along the perpendicular direction. A flat-field image was used to
correct the variation in sensitivity across the detector. The spectra
were summed along the spatial dispersive direction to give rise to
a typical photoemission spectrum. This procedure was used for the
spectra in Figures b, 4b, 5e,f, and Figure a.
Figure 10
Comparison of (a) experimental valence band spectra of
Cu2O (internal standard) and CuO measured at hν
= 170 eV and
(b + c) DFT calculated DOS, weighted by their photoionization cross
sections at 170 eV, of Cu2O and the proposed structure
candidates.
(a) Analyzed
XPEEM valence band maps measured in p(O2) = 1 × 10–5 mbar and 300 °C at a photon
energy of hν = 170 eV. The map shows the spatial
distribution of CuO. The color scale represents the percentage of the reference
spectrum used to fit the map. The corresponding summed spectra of
the bright colored and dark colored regions in (a) are shown in (b,c).
Two components (i.e., reference metallic AgCu and reference CuO spectrum)
are required to fit the data.Comparison
of photoemission spectra from CuO/AgCu(111) with reference spectra.
(a) Cu 2p core level spectra. (b) Cu LMM Auger spectra. (c) Ag 3d5/2 spectra and (d) O 1s spectra.Experimental
NEXAFS spectra of the Cu L-edge (a) and O K-edge (b)
and reference spectra of similar structures [Cu, Cu2O,
CuO, and O/Cu(111)]. The spectra containing CuO/AgCu(111) were measured in an
oxidizing atmosphere (1 × 10–5 mbar O2, 300 °C).3D models of proposed
structured candidates. (a) Chemisorbed oxygen
(Cu4O4), (b) p2, (c) p4, and (d) CuO-1ML.Comparison of (a) experimental valence band spectra of
Cu2O (internal standard) and CuO measured at hν
= 170 eV and
(b + c) DFT calculated DOS, weighted by their photoionization cross
sections at 170 eV, of Cu2O and the proposed structure
candidates.The XPS spectra measured in near-ambient
pressure conditions (at
the BelChem beamline) were measured using a Specs GmbH Phoibos 150-NAP
analyzer. In this process, (1) the photon energy was chosen, (2) the
photon energy is calibrated by measuring the Fermi level, (3) electrons
pass through a hemispherical analyzer holding a constant pass energy,
thereby acting as a band-pass filter for electrons, (4) the photoelectrons
strike a 140-channel 1D delay-line detector at the end of the hemisphere,
(5) the kinetic energy of incoming electrons is ramped using a retarding
potential, in the standard fixed-analyzer-transmission mode, and (6)
the detector channel representing count rates for electrons having
same kinetic energies are binned together. Such measurements result
in XPS spectra as shown in Figures c,d,e, 5e,f, and 7.
Figure 2
ESEM images
of (A) a reduced AgCu foil (0.5 at. % Cu) and (B) the
same foil while heated in 0.3 mbar ethylene and oxygen at 300 °C.
(C) In situ NAP-XPS valence spectra (hν = 150
eV) measured as a time series under epoxidation conditions (time step
= 50 min, 0.3 mbar, 1:1 O2/C2H4,
300 C). (D) Comparison of a difference spectrum generated (see Supporting Information for details) with a reference
spectrum of Cu2O. (E) Comparison of several in situ measurements,
using a Phoibos NAP-150 analyzer (i–iii) with a measurement
performed in ultra-high-vacuum, using an XPEEM analyzer (iv). Spectra
i and ii are measured in 0.5 mbar of a 1:1 mixture of ethylene and
oxygen. Spectrum (iii) is measured in 0.5 mbar of a dilute–O2 mixture containing 1:50 mixture of oxygen to ethylene. Spectrum
(iv) is measured on a AgCu(111) single crystal at 300 °C in 1
× 10–5 mbar O2.
Figure 7
Comparison
of photoemission spectra from CuO/AgCu(111) with reference spectra.
(a) Cu 2p core level spectra. (b) Cu LMM Auger spectra. (c) Ag 3d5/2 spectra and (d) O 1s spectra.
The NEXAFS spectra were measured at the BelChem beamline.
The spectra
were measured by (1) scanning the photon energy across some range
and (2) measuring the total electron yield by measuring the drain
current at the nozzle of a Specs GmbH Phoibos 150-NAP analyzer, positioned
1 mm away from the sample surface.
Results
Linking NAP-XPS with XPEEM
The AgCu
alloy (0.5 at. % Cu) was first characterized using NAP-XPS and ESEM
at conditions where ethylene epoxidation can occur (i.e. in a 1:1
mixture of ethylene and O2, at 300 °C). Under these
conditions, silver oxides are not stable, while copper oxides are,[4,10,12] and consequently, Cu becomes
preferentially oxidized, forming Cu-containing oxides at the surface.
For instance, Figure shows ESEM images of a polycrystalline AgCu foil (0.5 at. % Cu)
prior to (Figure A)
and during (Figure B) ethylene epoxidation (conditions are 1:1 C2H4/O2, Ptot = 0.3 mbar at 300
°C). One can see that, during ethylene epoxidation, the surface
becomes decorated with a variety of different copper-containing oxides,
as evident from the various island morphologies and changes in contrast
in Figure B (EDX maps
are provided in Figure S17).In situ
valence band photoemission spectra (Figure C–E) give an indication of the identities
of the oxides present on the surface. The valence band spectra reflect
the electronic structure of a material (particularly, the occupied
DOS) and can be used as a fingerprint to distinguish CuO, Cu2O, and metallic Ag.[13,14] The valence band spectra of AgCu
in epoxidation conditions (Figure C) show a signal that is a linear combination of several
distinct valence band fingerprints. From a multivariate analysis of
the spectrum stack in Figure C, we find that the spectra are composed of spectra from several
species (see analysis in Supporting Information), including a metallic AgCu signal and some unidentified species
with a line shape similar but distinct from Cu2O, as shown
in Figure D. This
species was previously shown to be correlated with epoxide selectivity.[4]Figure D shows the spectrum of this unknown species after subtracting
a portion of metal Ag signal from the mixed-signal spectrum. The resulting
difference spectrum is plotted with a reference spectrum of Cu2O and exhibits distinct differences in line shape and position.
These observations imply that a species is present on the surface,
having an electronic structure similar to that of Cu2O.This information alone is not sufficient to determine the atomic
structure of the unknown phase. To identify the phase, one needs to
isolate it. However, the feature sizes of this phase are on the order
of hundreds of nanometers (Figure B). To obtain a phase pure spectral signature, one
requires spectroscopic methods with nanometer spatial resolution.
To this end, we utilized XPEEM, with which one can obtain photoelectron
spectra with a spatial resolution of ca. 20 nm. Unfortunately, this
method is not capable of measurements under the same conditions as
NAP-XPS; so one must first verify that the signatures observed in
NAP-XPS are also present under the conditions of XPEEM measurements.As shown in Figure E, the spectroscopic features observed in situ could also be produced
ex situ by heating a sputter-cleaned alloy surface in 10–5 mbar O2. Figure E shows several examples of the oxide formed in situ, including
(i) an Ag99.5Cu0.5 sample at 350 °C in
0.5 mbar mixture of 1:1 O2/C2H4,
(ii) an Ag98Cu2 sample at 350 °C in 0.5
mbar mixture of 1:1 O2/C2H4, and
(iii) an Ag99.5Cu0.5 sample at 350 °C in
a 1:50 mixture of O2/C2H4.Figure shows a
LEEM image and XPEEM maps of a polycrystalline AgCu alloy after oxidation
in 10–5 mbar O2. These images show a
region of the surface where both Cu2O and the unknown phase
are present. The Cu2O region is the island in the left
half of the image (labeled A), as determined using spectro-microscopy
image stacks. The image stacks represent a spatial map of the valence
band spectra (measured using hν = 150 eV).
The spectra extracted from the Cu2O region and unknown-phase
region are shown in Figure b. These spectra were obtained by restricting the area-of-interest
(AOI) of the spectrometer by using a field aperture, such that a single
phase covers the entire AOI, and then measuring an XPS spectrum. Figure c,d shows the spatial
distribution of the two valence spectra (Cu2O and CuO). The data
processing methods are explained in the Materials
and Methods section.The beauty of this data set is that
the unknown structure and the
reference structure (Cu2O) are both present in the same
field of view, such that Cu2O acts as an internal standard.
With this configuration, the subtle spectroscopic differences can
be very accurately compared. We can see that the difference in line
shapes between Cu2O and the unknown phase observed under
XPEEM conditions is qualitatively the same as what was observed during
the NAP-XPS measurements (see Figure E), suggesting that the phases formed in NAP-XPS were
also stable in the XPEEM instrument. From here on, we will refer to
the unknown phase as CuO.The polycrystalline alloy surface oxidizes
non-homogeneously, with
the CuO phase
covering large proportions (several tens of micrometers wide) of the
surface, with the occasional appearance of Cu2O islands,
typically similar in size to that shown in Figure . Through exploration of the surface, we
found regions where no oxidation had occurred, and the surface was
still metallic. Figure a shows a LEEM image of such a region. Here, the CuO surface phase terminates, and
the metallic AgCu surface is exposed.The valence spectra in Figure b clearly show the
different valence structures of
the two regions. The red and blue curves in Figure b are the valence spectra from the regions
labeled in Figure a as A and B, respectively. Figure c,d show the spatial distributions of the two valence
spectra, illustrating that region A is the CuO phase, and region B is the non-oxidized
AgCu surface. LEED patterns of these regions reveal that the AgCu
surface has a (111) termination, and the CuO has a pseudo-(2 × 2) superstructure
on the (111) termination. Here, we use the prefix “pseudo”
because, on close examination of the diffraction spots, one can distinguish
a Moiré pattern, implying the overlayer’s lattice parameter
is either slightly larger or slightly smaller than that of the underlying
metal lattice. A structural model for the surface is discussed in
detail in Section .
Examination of AgCu(111)
To better
understand the structure of the CuO surface phase, we repeated the XPEEM measurements
with a AgCu(111) single crystal. Using a single crystalline sample
ensures more controlled sample conditions and avoids effects related
to grain boundaries. The Ag(111) single crystal contained ca. 0.7
at. % Cu, as determined by a laboratory-based XPS (see Figure S1). Here we compare the LEEM, LEED, and
valence spectra of the pristine AgCu(111) surface (after 23 consecutive
sputter-annealing cycles) with the same surface after oxidizing the
sample in 1 × 10–5 mbar O2 at 300
°C for 1 h inside the XPEEM analysis chamber.As seen in
the LEEM image in Figure a, the pristine AgCu(111) surface was relatively homogeneous,
with flat terraces 1–2 μm wide, with mono-atomic steps
discernible as very fine lines on the terraces. The LEEM image after
oxidation shows strong contrast, with localized bright features on
the order of ∼100 nm in diameter covering the surface. As explained
further with Figure , the bright features are metallic AgCu, and the dark features are
CuO. These
observations imply that a discontinuous mesh-like oxidic structure
had formed over the surface.
Figure 6
(a) Analyzed
XPEEM valence band maps measured in p(O2) = 1 × 10–5 mbar and 300 °C at a photon
energy of hν = 170 eV. The map shows the spatial
distribution of CuO. The color scale represents the percentage of the reference
spectrum used to fit the map. The corresponding summed spectra of
the bright colored and dark colored regions in (a) are shown in (b,c).
Two components (i.e., reference metallic AgCu and reference CuO spectrum)
are required to fit the data.
From the LEED patterns in Figure c–d, one can
clearly identify the three-fold
symmetry of the pristine (111) oriented crystal. After oxidation,
the LEED pattern shows a pseudo-(2 × 2) periodicity with respect
to the Ag(111) surface, similar to the observation made on the oxidized
polycrystalline AgCu alloy, shown in Figure a.The valence spectra of the pristine
and oxidized surfaces are shown
in Figure e,f. Here,
we measured a series of valence spectra using several photon energies
spanning the Cooper minimum of the Ag 4d states (i.e. photon energies
from 150 to 230 and 350 eV). By observing how the relative intensities
change with photon energy, one can identify which features are from
Ag. The valence spectra in Figure e,f are normalized with respect to the intensity of
the Cu 3d peak (at ca. 3 eV). In the case of the pristine surface,
the Ag 4d states (at ca. 4–8 eV) increase relative to the Cu
3d states for photon energies away from the Cooper minimum. The spectra
also show the absence of O-related peaks (which would be at 2 eV)
at photon energies that are very sensitive to O 2p states (i.e. at hν = 150 eV). These observations imply that the surface
was metallic and contained only Ag and Cu within the field of view.In contrast, the valence spectra of the oxidized surface are dominated
by the Cu 3d- and O 2p-based features, with the Ag 4d features having
a substantial intensity only at photon energies far from the Cooper
minimum. The line-shape of the spectrum at hν
= 150 eV is essentially the same as that observed under near-ambient
pressure conditions using the same photon energy (Figure C).A XPEEM spectromicroscopy
map of the valence region was used to
identify the spatial features seen in the LEEM image of the oxidized
surface. Figure a
shows the mapping of the CuO spectrum. Figure b–c shows spectra extracted from various regions
of the map. A PCA of the 120 000 spectra in the image stack
showed that only two factors (i.e. spectroscopic entities/reference
spectra) are required to adequately fit the experimental data through
a linear combination of those factors. While PCA can indicate how
many components are needed to fit the data, it cannot reveal what
those components are. Thus, a subjective method was used to decide
which spectra to use as reference spectra (i.e. basis vectors) to
fit the measured spectra. The selected internal reference spectra
correspond to metallic AgCu and CuO, as shown in Figure b–c. The orange spectrum in Figure b represents the
sum of all spectra extracted from the bright-colored regions in Figure a, and the blue spectrum
in Figure c represents
the sum of spectra from the dark regions in Figure a.
Further Spectroscopic Characteristics
of CuO
From
the datasets shown so far, one cannot explicitly identify the atomic
structure of the overlayer; so we gathered further spectroscopic data
using in situ XPS and NEXAFS. Measurements were performed at 1 ×
10–5 mbar O2 and 300 °C. The Cu
2p photoemission spectrum of CuO (Figure a) reveals a binding energy of 932.35 eV, which is
nearly indistinguishable from Cu2O (binding energy of 932.3
eV).[12] The Cu LMM Auger spectrum in Figure b, however, shows
that the overlayer’s Cu LMM characteristics are significantly
different from all reference spectra (metallic copper, Cu2O and CuO).[15] Furthermore, the O 1s spectrum
of CuO (binding
energy of 529.5 eV) is between that of CuO and Cu2O and
is comparable with previous reports of O-terminated copper single
crystal surfaces.[12] The Ag 3d5/2 binding energy of 368.2 eV is indistinguishable from metallic silver.[16]The Cu L3-edge NEXAFS spectrum
reveals a very distinct feature of the CuO structure (Figure a). While the line-shape resembles Cu2O, the position of the absorption edge is shifted by 0.75
eV toward lower photon energy. This large shift implies a substantial
difference in properties between CuO and Cu2O. To precisely determine
the magnitude of this shift, we generated an internal standard by
over-oxidized the sample (0.2 mbar O2, 400 °C for
90 min) until bulk Cu2O formed on the surface. This procedure
allowed direct comparison of CuO and Cu2O (Figure a). As discussed in detail in the Supporting Information (see S4), the shift is
a result of the lack of a band gap in CuO. DFT calculations of the DOS show
that the oxide is electronically coupled to the underlying metal,
giving rise to states at the Fermi level. The O K-edge NEXAFS (Figure b) of CuO resembles O-terminated
Cu(111) surface, with features at 530.0 and 532.7 eV.[12] However, if an O-terminated Cu-surface were the correct
interpretation of the structure, the Cu L3-edge NEXAFS
spectrum should resemble metallic copper, which it not the case. In
summary, we observe an O K-edge that resembles O-terminated Cu, and
a Cu L-edge that resembles Cu2O, but with a substantial
shift (Figure b).
Figure 8
Experimental
NEXAFS spectra of the Cu L-edge (a) and O K-edge (b)
and reference spectra of similar structures [Cu, Cu2O,
CuO, and O/Cu(111)]. The spectra containing CuO/AgCu(111) were measured in an
oxidizing atmosphere (1 × 10–5 mbar O2, 300 °C).
Discussion
Candidate Structures
Copper’s
affinity for oxygen gives rise to adsorbate-driven surface segregation.[17−21] Several oxides could potentially be formed. Previous ab-initio thermodynamics
work identified three candidate structures likely formed on AgCu in
an oxidizing atmosphere:[21] (I) a chemisorbed
oxygen species (Figure a); (II) Cu2O-like structures including two different
candidates that are of particular interest: p2 (Figure b) and p4-OCu3 (Figure c); and (III) a structure derived
from CuO that we call CuO-1L (Figure d). The thermodynamic stability of these surface structures
depends on both the oxygen chemical potential (ΔμO) and the Cu solute concentration in the bulk of AgCu(111).
Figure 9
3D models of proposed
structured candidates. (a) Chemisorbed oxygen
(Cu4O4), (b) p2, (c) p4, and (d) CuO-1ML.
Because of the inherent error of DFT-based calculations, one cannot
definitively identify the structure solely by the calculated energy.
While the chemisorbed structure (Cu4O4) is too
high in energy to feasibly form, the p2 and p4-OCu3 structures
are predicted to be the most stable, with an almost degenerate Gibbs
surface free energy.[10] Given the stability
of these structures, and the fact that kinetics also plays a role
in oxide formation, a variety of oxides could be expected to coexist,
with a tendency to form bulk-like structures at higher Cu coverages
and increasing ΔμO.[10]The LEED patterns presented in Figures a and 5d strongly
suggest a (2 × 2) periodicity of the overlayer with respect to
the AgCu(111) surface. Hence, the (4 × 4) periodicity of the
p4-OCu3 structure is not observed, and we can discard this
structure as a candidate. It should be emphasized that the p2 structure
was proposed based on analogous systems (i.e. the “44”
structure on Cu).[10] However, given the
energy error inherent to DFT calculations, the subtle structural features,
such as the pseudo-registry observed here, are difficult to predict.
Further Selection of Structure Candidates
While the spectroscopic similarities to Cu2O suggests
p2 or p4-OCu3 as likely candidates, further confirmation
was obtained by comparing the measured valence spectra with simulated
spectra based on DFT calculated DOS. In order to compare with experimental
photoemission spectra, the calculated pDOS were scaled by the respective
computed gas-phase photo-ionization cross sections [σ(O 2p)
= 0.292 and σ(Cu 3d) = 3.644 at the experimentally used photon
energy of hν = 170 eV]. An energy-dependent
Lorentzian lifetime broadening was applied to the calculated DOS (0.003
eV broadening per eV). A three parameter Tougaard background was subtracted
from the measured spectra to account for the inelastic scattering
signal.Figure a shows the measured spectra of Cu2O and CuO. One can see that
Cu 3d band of CuO is narrower than Cu2O and is shifted toward higher
binding energy. These same differences are reproduced by the DFT calculations
of the p2 structure (Figure b). Not only are the peak position and the narrowness of the
Cu 3d states well reproduced, so too are the observed shifts of the
O 2p-related states (shoulder at ca. 1–2 eV).Chemisorbed
oxygen (Cu4O4) exhibits a somewhat
similar Cu 3d peak shape to the p2 structure (except for the substantially
larger intensity at 6–8 eV in the DOS of Cu4O4); however, Cu4O4 has a substantially
higher energy than the p2 structure and is not considered a likely
candidate for the observed phase.Finally, the CuO-1ML structure
exhibits a much broader feature
in the valence band than seen for CuO, similar to its structural analogue, bulk
CuO. The increased band width is due to the strong hybridization of
Cu 3d and O 2p states in CuO, giving rise to the feature at 4–6
eV.[15] From the partial DOS (Figure S5), one can see that the O states contribute
more intensively over a wider energy range to the measurable photoemission
signal as compared to the other candidate structures. The calculated
DOS of the CuO-1ML structure candidate in combination with the absence
of experimental evidence for Cu2+ in the Cu 2p core level
spectrum (i.e. strong satellite structure) leads us to conclude that
CuO-1ML is an unlikely candidate.
Structure
Model
Based on the experimental
evidence, the overlayer appears to be based on the p2 structure, however,
with a subtle difference. As shown in Figure d, the LEED pattern of CuO exhibits a Moiré pattern,
suggesting that the overlayer is slightly incommensurate with the
Ag(111) surface. This observation could imply that the CuO structure is either
expanded or compressed in all directions parallel to the AgCu(111)
surface. However, an interesting change occurs upon annealing. When
annealed to 500 °C, the CuO domains coalesce into larger patches, and
the diffraction pattern changes (see Figure a,b), such that the Moiré spots no
longer exhibit the three-fold symmetry of the substrate but rather
a two-fold symmetry, as shown in Figure d,e. The fact that the Moiré pattern
becomes 2-fold symmetric after annealing implies that the expansion/compression
of the p2 lattice is actually only in one lattice direction and that
the 6-fold Moiré pattern was a consequence of symmetry equivalent
rotational domains.
Figure 11
(a–c) LEEM images (Ekin = 16
eV) measured at increasing annealing temperatures in 1 × 10–5 mbar O2. (d–f) Corresponding LEED
patterns from the images in (a–c). (g–i) Lattice models
illustrating how the CuO islands nucleate, coalesce, and then decompose at
increasing temperatures.
(a–c) LEEM images (Ekin = 16
eV) measured at increasing annealing temperatures in 1 × 10–5 mbar O2. (d–f) Corresponding LEED
patterns from the images in (a–c). (g–i) Lattice models
illustrating how the CuO islands nucleate, coalesce, and then decompose at
increasing temperatures.Figure g–i
depicts a structural model to explain the observed diffraction pattern
changes with increasing temperatures. At 350 °C, three distinct
rotational domains nucleate on the surface, each with a pseudo-(2
× 2) structure, expanded or compressed relative to the substrate
by 8% in the ⟨1–10⟩ directions. The domains nucleate
and grow until the fast-growing direction intersects a neighboring
domain. When domains meet, growth in the fast direction stops and
only proceeds in the perpendicular directions, but slower. This growth
mechanism can explain the observed surface morphology and LEED patterns
seen in Figure c,d.
When the surface—kinetically stuck in this state—is
annealed, the kinetic barriers of surface diffusion are overcome,
and the overlayer recrystallizes, with Ostwald ripening giving rise
to a few large dominant rotational domains, as depicted in Figure b.Calculated
Gibb’s free energies of compressed and expanded
p2 lattices, having superstructures of (12 × 2), (13 × 2),
and (14 × 2) unit cell sizes relative to the Ag(111) surface
(see Table S6), show that the 8% distortion
is an expansion of the p2 lattice. The free energy minimum was found
to be the (13 × 2) superstructure. An atomic model of the structure
is shown in Figure . The Cu2O-like lattice in the (13 × 2) structure
has a +4.1% strain in the ⟨0–11⟩ direction and
a strain of −4.2% in the ⟨01–1⟩ direction,
relative to bulk Cu2O. With this pseudo-commensurate overlayer
structure, Cu atoms of the overlayer are situated in several coordination
sites of the substrate (i.e., hollow, bridge, and top sites). Calculations
in which the p2 structure is translated across the Ag into various
coordination sites show that Cu in the p2 structure has almost no
preference for a coordination site (Table S7), indicating a very weak interaction between the overlayer oxide
and the metal surface.
Figure 12
(a) Real space model of the overlayer oxide
structure on the AgCu(111)
surface. The (13 × 2) unit cell is indicated. (b) Calculated
free energy of formation for three overlayer unit cells with varying
amounts of expansion in one direction.
(a) Real space model of the overlayer oxide
structure on the AgCu(111)
surface. The (13 × 2) unit cell is indicated. (b) Calculated
free energy of formation for three overlayer unit cells with varying
amounts of expansion in one direction.
Electronic Structure of the 2D-Oxide
The
majority of the experimental and theoretical data indicate that
the chemical state of the proposed CuO structure is similar to that of Cu2O. The measured Cu 2p binding energies presented in Figure a only differ by
0.05 eV compared to Cu2O, and ground state DFT calculations
show very similar initial-state energies of the two structures (Table S9). Moreover, Löwdin charge population
analysis revealed both structures to have comparable charge densities
(Table S10). However, the position of the
Cu L-edge of the CuO structure is significantly different from Cu2O,
with the absorption edge of CuO being 0.75 eV lower than Cu2O (Figure a). As elaborated
in Supporting Information (see Figure S4),
the reason for this shift is due to the lack of a band gap in the
p2 structure when it is electronically coupled to the metallic substrate,
as weak hybridization between the overlayer with the substrate gives
rise to DOS across the Fermi level (see Figure S15). The white line shift seen in NEXAFS is not an indication
of the charge on the Cu centers. In fact, all data suggest that the
oxidation state of Cu in the p2 structure is very close to that of
Cu in Cu2O.
Comparison with Other Known
Structures
There is a substantial body of knowledge about
surface structures
of Cu single crystals when exposed to low oxygen pressures.[22−28] In general, there are two types of structure: (1) non-oxide like
and (2) oxide-like monolayers. The type-1 structures consist of O
ions bound to the Cu surface, where the translational symmetry of
the O lattice does not resemble the O-sub-lattice of any copper oxide.
In contrast, the type-2 structures resemble a single lattice plane
of Cu2O and can be thought of as 2D oxides.[22,29,30] Because of the differences in
the preferred Cu spacing of the oxide sub-lattice planes and the metallic
Cu substrate, the oxide layers are quasi-epitaxial and exhibit interfacial
strain with the underlying substrate.[25]The Cu(100) and Cu(110) surfaces are only known to form type-1
structures. However, after large doses of oxygen, Cu2O
nucleates on the surfaces and exhibits 3D growth.[23,31] In contrast, the Cu(111) surface prefers to form an oxide-like 2D
structure on its surface (with a meta-stable chemisorbed structure
formed only within a narrow range of conditions).[25] The 2D oxide that forms on Cu(111) is structurally analogous
to the (111) plane of bulk Cu2O.The preference for
non-oxide-like versus oxide-like structures
is driven by the Cu–O bond strength in the overlayer structure
compared to the O-substrate bond strength. For the Cu(100) and Cu(110)
surfaces, the Cu atoms are not very densely packed, allowing for a
high coordination to O ions, and consequently strong Cu–O bonds.
In contrast, the Cu(111) surface, which is densely packed, cannot
provide high coordination to adsorbed O ions. Consequently, the Cu–O
bond to the Cu(111) surface is comparatively weak, and the Cu–O
bond in the 2D oxide is preferred.To draw a comparison with
the p2 structure on AgCu, O forms a weak
bond with Ag and prefers to be in a coordination environment surrounded
by Cu ions. This preference drives O and Cu to form the oxide-like
surface structure rather than a chemisorbed structure. However, the
superstructure of the 2D oxide on AgCu exhibits a unit cell 13 times
larger than the Ag(111) repeating unit, and only distorted in one
crystallographic direction while the oxide-like layers on Cu(111),
such as the “29” and “44” structures,
exhibit unit cells that are 29-times and 44-times larger than the
Cu(111) repeating unit and are isotropic.
Relation
to Ethylene Epoxidation
Previous works on ethylene epoxidation
over silver catalysts have
identified several adsorbed oxygen species present on Ag that could
play a role in epoxidation[32−36] The identities of these species are still debated in the literature,
but the hypothesized species include chemisorbed, ordered O-ions,
chemisorbed disordered O-ions, sub-surface species, and species from
common impurities, such as SiO2 and SO.[35,37−41]Under the conditions used in the present work
to oxidize AgCu, some regions of the surface remained non-oxidized
(as seen in Figure ). These regions consist of metallic AgCu. The valence band spectra
of these regions indicate that the metallic surface remains oxygen-free
(there is no superstructure in the LEED pattern, and the valence band
spectrum bears the signature of the clean alloy surface). Presumably,
copper’s much higher propensity for O compared to silver’s
caused any adsorbed O ions to be incorporated into the CuO film.[21] However, at higher pressures, one would expect a more dynamic
situation, where a steady-state population of adsorbed O species would
develop on the metallic surface as well. Evidence of this assumption
can be seen in the difference spectrum from NAP-XPS conditions of Figure B, where the metallic
alloy spectrum exhibits some evidence of adsorbed O species (the feature
at 1–2 eV). It is possible that at higher pressure, O ions
could dynamically exchange between the CuO film, metallic surface, and ethylene.Whether or not the CuO structure plays an active role in epoxidation is
left up for debate, as a conclusive answer to this question is outside
the scope of the present work. While the structure has previously
been shown to be correlated with epoxide selectivity,[4] theoretical work has also shown that epoxidation on the
p2 structure would have a quite high activation barrier (calculated
using DFT to be 1.49 eV).[42] Alternatively,
the oxide could work as a source or sink for adsorbed O-species on
the metallic surface, giving rise to high population of selective
O-species or decrease in population of non-selective O-species. Such
a mechanism has been proposed to be the reason why small amounts of
sulfur can enhance epoxide selectivity.[41] Furthermore, the decomposition of CuO shown in the present work (Figure c) indicates that
the 2D oxide is relatively unstable (compared to Cu2O).
Thus, it is quite possible that it plays an important role in populating
the Ag surface with O ions.
Conclusions
We have experimentally determined that a two-dimensional meta-stable
CuO surface
oxide forms on AgCu alloys under ethylene epoxidation conditions using
a combination of in situ, model and theoretical experiments. The structure
is in essence a lattice plane of Cu2O placed on an Ag surface.
It exhibits a copper oxidation state similar to Cu in Cu2O; however, a weak coupling to the underlying metal affords its metallic
properties. We thoroughly characterize the structure using XPEEM,
LEED, UPS, XPS, and NEXAFS and compare the findings with DFT calculations.
The structure is similar to the p2 structure previously predicted
by Piccinin et al.[21] but exhibits a pseudo-commensurate
relationship with the underlying metal, with a unidirectional 8% expansion,
relative to the underlying substrate.The current study showcases
the need of combining a multitude of
experimental and theoretical approaches to elucidate the structures
of a meta-stable species formed in reactive environments. A systematic
linking of experimental results, by means of common attributes to
bridge the pressure and complexity gap between individual approaches,
enables the development of a valuable synergy between experiments
and theory.
Authors: Federico J Williams; Daniel P C Bird; Alejandra Palermo; Ashok K Santra; Richard M Lambert Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2004-07-14 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Th Schmidt; H Marchetto; P L Lévesque; U Groh; F Maier; D Preikszas; P Hartel; R Spehr; G Lilienkamp; W Engel; R Fink; E Bauer; H Rose; E Umbach; H-J Freund Journal: Ultramicroscopy Date: 2010-07-13 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Dang Sheng Su; Timo Jacob; Thomas W Hansen; Di Wang; Robert Schlögl; Bert Freitag; Stephan Kujawa Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2008 Impact factor: 15.336