Spatio-temporal nonuniformities in H2 oxidation on individual Rh(h k l) domains of a polycrystalline Rh foil were studied in the 10-6 mbar pressure range by photoemission electron microscopy (PEEM), X-ray photoemission electron microscopy (XPEEM), and low-energy electron microscopy (LEEM). The latter two were used for in situ correlative microscopy to zoom in with significantly higher lateral resolution, allowing detection of an unusual island-mediated oxygen front propagation during kinetic transitions. The origin of the island-mediated front propagation was rationalized by model calculations based on a hybrid approach of microkinetic modeling and Monte Carlo simulations.
Spatio-temporal nonuniformities in H2 oxidation on individual Rh(h k l) domains of a polycrystalline Rh foil were studied in the 10-6 mbar pressure range by photoemission electron microscopy (PEEM), X-ray photoemission electron microscopy (XPEEM), and low-energy electron microscopy (LEEM). The latter two were used for in situ correlative microscopy to zoom in with significantly higher lateral resolution, allowing detection of an unusual island-mediated oxygen front propagation during kinetic transitions. The origin of the island-mediated front propagation was rationalized by model calculations based on a hybrid approach of microkinetic modeling and Monte Carlo simulations.
Heterogeneous catalysis is one of the
key enablers of sustainable
energy generation and storage. For example, renewable energy can be
stored in the chemical bonds of hydrogen and released on-demand via
H2 oxidation in a fuel cell,[1] rendering a fundamental understanding crucial for efficient operation.[2]The interaction between active sites in
a heterogeneous catalytic
reaction may lead to spatial nonuniformities of the local reaction
rates, which may also vary in time.[3−5] Such pattern formation
has often been observed for reactions with oscillatory or multistable
kinetics, such as H2 or CO oxidation, NO reduction, or
NO2 reduction on noble metals,[5−9] and has been a subject of longstanding studies and
several reviews.[10−12] Recently, single-crystal studies were extended to
more realistic systems, and a number of effects were detected that
influence the spatio-temporal structures: multifrequential oscillations,
both in μm-[13] and nm-sized[14] systems, frequency transformation by grain boundaries[15] and by atomic rows,[14] coexisting multi-states[16] and nm scale
reaction pacemakers.[17] These previous studies
have demonstrated the plethora of novel effects that may occur in
surface reactions. However, studying aspects such as communication
between adjacent domains or facets acting as individual oscillators
still remains a challenge. The same concerns the mechanisms of pattern
formation on a heterogeneous surface with varying sample topology.
To address these challenges, it is necessary to significantly improve
the lateral resolution, preferentially combined with chemical sensitivity.
Still, conventional modeling approaches have typically been focused
on either mean-field kinetic modeling well applicable to extended
homogeneous systems[13,15,16] or Monte Carlo simulations on the traditional atomic length and
time scales.[11,18] To combine both approaches for
the simulation of processes on mesoscopic heterogeneous surfaces is
another challenge in studying surface reactions.To reveal the
mechanisms of spatio-temporal effects, it is advantageous
to study these dynamic processes in situ at different length scales
using different microscopy techniques. Such an approach was recently
applied to monitor CO and H2 oxidation at different length
scales on rhodium samples with different morphologies, i.e., single
crystals, μm-sized domains of a polycrystalline foil, and facets
of a nanotip.[19,20]The most straightforward
way to draw correct conclusions from such
studies is to apply different microscopies to the same surface structure,
if possible, under the same conditions. The approach stems from biological
research, where the first efforts of correlative light and electron
microscopy (CLEM) on the same cell/tissue structures were made already
in the 1970s.[21,22] In the meantime, CLEM has been
extended to a broad category of methods combining any type of light
and electron microscopy on the same sample.[23] Actually, other imaging techniques such as atomic force microscopy
(AFM), X-ray tomography, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) are
also successfully used in a correlative microscopy approach.[24,25] In the last few decades, correlative analysis has made a vast impact
in materials research, combining, e.g., transmission electron microscopy
(TEM) with atom probe tomography (APT)[26] or Raman with SEM.[27,28] Using protective coatings, changes
in the sample resulting from transfer (air exposure) between different
devices can be avoided.[29] In catalysis,
the correlative microscopy approach, often applied in different setups,[30−32] has reached its highest development stage when different microscopies,
e.g., single-molecule fluorescence microscopy (SMF) and TEM are combined
in one instrument.[33] Dual microscopy combinations,
such as LEEM/PEEM,[34] LEEM/XPEEM,[35] or PEEM/SPEM,[36] were
also previously used to study potassium redistribution in alkali-promoted
H2 oxidation on Rh(110).Here, we present a refinement
of this concept, combining three
different microscopic techniques (PEEM, XPEEM, and LEEM) for in situ
imaging of catalytic H2 oxidation on the same structures
of the same Rh sample, i.e., in a correlative approach. Two of them,
XPEEM (with chemical sensitivity) and LEEM (with a resolution of 2.6
nm, i.e., much better than in conventional PEEM), were even combined
in a single setup and thus under truly identical reaction conditions.
Additionally, the selected small area (1.5 μm diameter) electron
diffraction (μ-LEED) mode of LEEM was used for the determination
of the local crystallography.As a model system, individual
differently oriented well-defined
μm-sized Rh(h k l) domains of
a polycrystalline Rh foil were used, all being automatically under
identical reaction conditions. The ongoing catalytic reaction was
monitored in situ by all three microscopies, and an analysis of the
recorded video frames provides time-resolved data of the observed
process (kinetics by imaging[37]).The approach is illustrated in Figure a: an individual Rh(h k l) domain can be selected from the surface structure library (XPEEM,
LEEM), or even a few different domains in the field of view can be
studied simultaneously (PEEM). The different employed microscopy techniques
vary in magnification, resolution, and origin of the information carriers:
secondary (inelastically scattered) electrons form the image in PEEM
with UV-light excitation (Figure b), core level electrons in XPEEM (Figure c), and backscattered low-energy
electrons in LEEM (bright-field imaging mode was used, Figure d). All available Rh(h k l) domains were crystallographically characterized
beforehand by electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD). No electron
beam and X-ray beam effects were observed in the present experiments.
This was directly proven by in situ switching between the XPEEM and
LEEM modes in the present study and between LEEM and PEEM[34] as well as between PEEM and metastable impact
electron emission microscopy (MIEEM), known as the least invasive
surface analysis method,[38] in earlier experiments
on H2 oxidation on Rh.
Figure 1
Correlative microscopy approach: (a) different
information is collected
in situ from the same individual domain of a polycrystalline Rh foil
using different imaging techniques; (b) in PEEM with UV-light excitation,
inelastically scattered photoemitted electrons create the image; (c)
in XPEEM with X-ray excitation, energy-filtered core level electrons
provide the image contrast; and (d) in LEEM, elastically backscattered
electrons are utilized. The bright-field imaging mode with a contrast
aperture selecting the specularly reflected electron beam was used.
Correlative microscopy approach: (a) different
information is collected
in situ from the same individual domain of a polycrystalline Rh foil
using different imaging techniques; (b) in PEEM with UV-light excitation,
inelastically scattered photoemitted electrons create the image; (c)
in XPEEM with X-ray excitation, energy-filtered core level electrons
provide the image contrast; and (d) in LEEM, elastically backscattered
electrons are utilized. The bright-field imaging mode with a contrast
aperture selecting the specularly reflected electron beam was used.In the present work, we have taken up the abovementioned
pattern
formation challenge by studying catalytic H2 oxidation
on Rh, an often-studied reaction that still keeps the mechanisms of
spatial propagation hidden. Due to the well-known reaction mechanism,
the reaction is well suited for the application of novel modeling
approaches. A combined application of PEEM, LEEM, with its significantly
higher resolution, and XPEEM, with its chemical sensitivity, all used
in situ on the same surface regions, has allowed us to gain unprecedented
insights into the mechanisms behind the formation of spatio-temporal
patterns. A novel hybrid modeling approach combining microkinetic
modeling and Monte Carlo simulations corroborated the experimental
data well and allowed time-dependent simulations in a kind of virtual
reaction microscopy.
Results and Discussion
PEEM Studies
The ongoing H2 oxidation reaction
on Rh was visualized in an ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) PEEM setup operated
as a flow reactor. The setup is equipped with a deuterium discharge
lamp (Heraeus D200F, photon energy ∼6.5 eV) for UV illumination,
a Staib Instruments PEEM 150 system, a high-speed CCD camera (Hamamatsu
C11440-42U30), a quadrupole mass spectrometer (MKS e-Vison 2), gas
dosing (Ar, H2, O2; purity 99.999%), and sample
cleaning facilities. More details on the experimental procedures are
given in the Supporting Information.Figure a shows a
PEEM snapshot from a video sequence recorded during the ongoing reaction
at constant T = 468 K, pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar, pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar. The image contrast
results from the differences in the local work function, which in
turn depends on the adsorbate coverage: the catalytically inactive
(oxygen-covered) Rh(h k l) surface
appears generally darker than the catalytically active (low Hads and Oads coverage) surface due to the higher
work function of the oxygen-covered Rh surface. An illustration of
the catalytically active and inactive states is given in the Supporting
Information (Figure S2).
Figure 2
PEEM zoom-in on catalytic
H2 oxidation on a polycrystalline
Rh foil at pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar, pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar, and T = 468 K: (a) PEEM snapshot taken during
the ongoing reaction with three regions of interest (ROIs) marked;
(b) electron-optical zoom-in (10-fold higher magnification) PEEM snapshot
of the region marked by a white circle in panel (a); (c) EBSD map
and crystallographic orientations (Miller indices) of the same region
with the same ROIs as in panel (a); the legend for the color code
is given as an inset in the lower right corner; (d) ball models of
the Rh(7 5 5), Rh(4 3 2), and Rh(7 5 4) surfaces; and (e) time series
of the local PEEM intensities obtained for the structurally different
ROIs marked in panels (a) and (b).
PEEM zoom-in on catalytic
H2 oxidation on a polycrystalline
Rh foil at pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar, pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar, and T = 468 K: (a) PEEM snapshot taken during
the ongoing reaction with three regions of interest (ROIs) marked;
(b) electron-optical zoom-in (10-fold higher magnification) PEEM snapshot
of the region marked by a white circle in panel (a); (c) EBSD map
and crystallographic orientations (Miller indices) of the same region
with the same ROIs as in panel (a); the legend for the color code
is given as an inset in the lower right corner; (d) ball models of
the Rh(7 5 5), Rh(4 3 2), and Rh(7 5 4) surfaces; and (e) time series
of the local PEEM intensities obtained for the structurally different
ROIs marked in panels (a) and (b).To study the reaction behavior on structurally
different Rh(h k l) domains, the local
PEEM intensity was
analyzed for different regions of interest (ROIs) on the surface.
Three ROIs were placed on different Rh(h k l) regions, crystallographically defined by EBSD in a field emission
scanning electron microscope (FEI Quanta 200F, further details are
given in the Supporting Information). The
corresponding local PEEM intensity time series are shown in Figure e, revealing cardinal
differences in the kinetic behavior of different regions: ROI 1 constantly
remains in the catalytically active state, whereas ROI 2 shows a self-sustaining
oscillating mode of the reaction (frequency 0.7 mHz). The reaction
course for ROI 3 is actually not clear: oscillatory behavior can neither
be presumed nor excluded.To explain the remarkable differences
in the local reaction behavior,
we refer to the color-coded EBSD map in Figure c, with the color code given as an inset
in the lower right corner. The EBSD characterization reveals that
ROIs 1 and 2 are located on homogeneous Rh(7 5 5) and Rh(4 3 2) domains,
respectively, while ROI 3 was placed within a domain of a rather heterogeneous
surface structure.The reaction modes observed at the present
conditions for the homogeneous
Rh(7 5 5) and Rh(4 3 2) domains can be understood in view of recent
studies in which different reaction modes of H2 oxidation
were simultaneously observed on adjacent crystallographically different
regions.[16] The Rh(7 5 5) surface (ROI 1)
is characterized by [1 1 1]-type terraces in combination with nonkinked
[1 0 0]-type step edges. The Rh(4 3 2) surface (ROI 2) is also characterized
by [1 1 1]-type terraces but combined with kinked [2 1 0]-type step
edges. This is illustrated in atomic ball models in Figure d. The structural differences
lead to differing kinetic behavior: as recently shown, the formation
and depletion of subsurface oxygen on the Rh(h k l) surfaces and the resulting enabling or inhibition of dissociative
hydrogen adsorption may lead to self-sustaining oscillations in H2 oxidation, with the activation energy of the oxygen incorporation
governing the oscillation frequency.[13−16] An illustration of the oscillation
cycle and further details of the mechanism of the oscillations are
presented in the Supporting Information (Figure S2) and have been extensively discussed previously.[13−16] For Rh, the activation energy of subsurface oxygen formation strongly
varies with the surface roughness, with the kink sites playing a particular
role.[39] The Rh(4 3 2) surface exhibits
kinked step edges, which accelerates the formation/depletion of subsurface
oxygen compared to the nonkinked Rh(7 5 5) surface. This leads to
the observed oscillatory reaction behavior on the Rh(4
3 2) surface, whereas the Rh(7 5 5) surface remains
in the catalytically active state at the present conditions.To evaluate the reaction behavior within ROI 3, where the discrimination
between a possible steady state and oscillatory behavior seems difficult,
the reaction was monitored at the same conditions but with an electron-optical
magnification 10 times higher than that of Figure a. Figure b shows the corresponding PEEM video frame, revealing
instable bright and dark spots that are invisible at lower magnification.
Placing additional ROIs (ROIs 4 and 5) on such spots and evaluating
the local PEEM intensities yield the two time series displayed in
the right panel of Figure e. While the PEEM intensity read out from ROI 5 remains constant,
the intensity within ROI 4 oscillates with a frequency of 0.9 mHz.
Apparently, on a structurally heterogeneous Rh surface, similar phenomena
as represented by the three curves in the left panel of Figure e take place but on a much
smaller length scale, possibly due to a significantly smaller correlation
length of individual oscillating regions due to structural peculiarities.
The black curve (ROI 3) in Figure e thus represents a weighted sum of both oscillating
and nonoscillating surface regions, which accounts for the difficulties
in interpreting the behavior when averaging over the whole ROI. To
understand these phenomena, alternative imaging methods with much
higher magnification, resolution, and chemical contrast appear promising.
Correlative LEEM and XPEEM Studies
As such alternative
imaging methods, the LEEM and XPEEM modes of the aberration-corrected
photoemission electron microscope equipped with an imaging energy
analyzer (SMART) at the UE49-PGM beamline of the BESSY II synchrotron
light source in Berlin were used (resolution limits of 2.6 and 18
nm for LEEM and XPEEM, respectively).[40,41] These modes
of the SMART microscope, described in detail elsewhere,[42,43] were applied in a correlative microscopy approach, combining the
imaging of the same sample by backscattered low-energy electrons (LEEM)
and X-ray photoemitted electrons (XPEEM). A 7.5 μm field of
view was chosen for the present studies to capture the processes of
interest. The local surface crystallography was determined by μ-LEED
(see the Supporting Information), while
μ-XPS was used for local chemical analysis. The UHV chamber
of the SMART microscope was used as a flow reactor for in situ visualization
of catalytic H2 oxidation on the same sample as in the
PEEM studies. The bright-field LEEM mode using the (00)-diffracted
electron beam for imaging was applied to monitor the reaction. The
LEEM image contains structural contrast but no direct chemical information,
which can be gained by XPEEM, however.Figure a shows selected LEEM video frames of the
reaction front propagation during self-sustained oscillations on a Rh(7 5 4) domain at constant T =
468 K, pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar, pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar. Two different types of reaction fronts were observed: a slow-moving
front in frames 1 and 2 (time difference of 120 s) and a fast-moving
front in frames 3 and 4 (time difference of 4 s). To understand the
chemical information encoded in the image contrast in Figure a, similar series of Rh 3d
XPEEM video frames (hν = 433 eV) were acquired, as exemplarily
shown in Figure b.
The image contrast in Figure b results from an energy window for Rh 3d XPEEM imaging being
chosen in the range 305.8–306.8 eV, marked in gray in Figure d,e. The choice of
this energy window is based on the local Rh 3d μ-XPS spectra
of the catalytically inactive and active states on the Rh(7 5 4) domain,
shown in Figure d,e,
respectively. Deconvolution of the measured XPS spectra was performed
based on literature data and is discussed in refs (16, 44−47). The spectra include a Rh bulk
component (Rhb) and two components for two different adsorbed
oxygen species (RhO and RhO, where i and j in RhO denote the
number of O atoms each Rh surface atom is bound to and the number
of Rh surface atoms each O atom is bound to, respectively).
Figure 3
Reaction front
identification using correlative microscopy: (a)
bright-field LEEM images of oxygen front propagation (frames 1 and
2) and hydrogen front propagation (frames 3 and 4) on the Rh(7 5 4)
domain at pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar, pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar, T = 468 K, and electron energy = 2.5 eV;
(b) the same, but imaged with XPEEM, the used binding energy window
is shaded gray in panels (d) and (e). In the dashed rectangular regions,
the image contrast is enhanced locally for better front visibility,
the insets in frames 3 and 4 illustrate the front positions; (c) local
LEEM (left) and XPEEM (right) image intensity profiles obtained from
the original data along the A–A′ line in panels (a)
and (b), the principle of the determination of the front propagation
velocity is illustrated; (d) Rh 3d XPS spectra locally measured on
the Rh(7 5 4) domain for the catalytically inactive state in H2 oxidation. Deconvolution of the peaks provides the Rhb and RhO components; (e) the same,
but for the catalytically active state, with an additional RhO component present in the deconvolution, identifying
the hydrogen front.
Reaction front
identification using correlative microscopy: (a)
bright-field LEEM images of oxygen front propagation (frames 1 and
2) and hydrogen front propagation (frames 3 and 4) on the Rh(7 5 4)
domain at pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar, pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar, T = 468 K, and electron energy = 2.5 eV;
(b) the same, but imaged with XPEEM, the used binding energy window
is shaded gray in panels (d) and (e). In the dashed rectangular regions,
the image contrast is enhanced locally for better front visibility,
the insets in frames 3 and 4 illustrate the front positions; (c) local
LEEM (left) and XPEEM (right) image intensity profiles obtained from
the original data along the A–A′ line in panels (a)
and (b), the principle of the determination of the front propagation
velocity is illustrated; (d) Rh 3d XPS spectra locally measured on
the Rh(7 5 4) domain for the catalytically inactive state in H2 oxidation. Deconvolution of the peaks provides the Rhb and RhO components; (e) the same,
but for the catalytically active state, with an additional RhO component present in the deconvolution, identifying
the hydrogen front.The presence of the RhO component is unambiguously
related to the active state in catalytic H2 oxidation.
The physical reasons for this relation are clarified in our previous
XPS study.[16] By choosing the proper energy
window, this component can thus be used as a basis for the contrast
in XPEEM, imaging the extent of the active state on the surface. For
better visualization of the reaction fronts, the image contrast of
the original XPEEM video frames was locally enhanced within the white
dashed rectangles in frames 3 and 4 of Figure b. Line profiles along the A–A′
line, shown in the insets of frames 3 and 4 of Figure b, illustrate the determination of reaction
front positions. Analysis of the front positions provides the velocities
of the reaction fronts, as shown in Figure c.Comparison of the front velocities
in the video files then allows
relating the image contrast in LEEM and XPEEM: at the used electron
energies of 2.5–3.5 eV, the inactive state (high oxygen coverage)
appears bright in LEEM but dark in XPEEM, whereas the active state
(low hydrogen and oxygen coverage) is dark in LEEM but bright in XPEEM.
This means that the transition from dark to bright in LEEM equals
a transition from bright to dark in XPEEM and vice versa.Understanding
the image contrast in LEEM allows spatially resolved
studies of local instabilities with ∼20 nm resolution (at the
given magnification), which were merely time-resolved in PEEM (Figure e). Figure shows the formation of spatio-temporal
patterns at different temperatures in the range 428–468 K,
with the reactant pressures kept constant at pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar and pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar. As an example, Figure a displays how during
a kinetic transition at 428 K accompanying each oscillation cycle,
the propagating hydrogen and oxygen fronts form a rotating double
spiral pattern, a phenomenon known from PEEM studies to occur on a
much larger length scale.[48]
Figure 4
Pattern formation in
catalytic H2 oxidation on Rh(7
5 4) visualized by LEEM at constant pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar and pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar: (a) rotating double
spiral formed at 428 K. Catalytically inactive regions appear bright,
while active regions appear dark in the LEEM video frames (electron
energy 2.5 eV); (b) island-assisted front propagation at 433 K. The
inset in frame 2 shows a μ-LEED image taken from the same region
at E = 330 eV, the red dotted line illustrates the
spot splitting, and the yellow arrow shows the step direction. The
inset in frame 3 shows the corresponding surface structure; (c) collapse
of an oxygen island before it can coalesce with other islands at 468
K. The position of the hydrogen front is indicated in frames 1 and
2. The inset in frame 3 shows the intensity recorded in ROI A during
the kinetic transition, the time points corresponding to frames 1
and 3 are indicated, all frames in panel (c) are recorded at an electron
energy of 3.3 eV; (d) schematic illustration of the island-assisted
front propagation, each third corresponds to the black dotted rectangles
in frames 1–3 in panel (b); (e) schematic illustration of the
oxygen island collapse, ROIs 4 and 5 schematically represent the corresponding
ROIs in Figure b;
(f) local velocities of the hydrogen (crosses) and oxygen (circles)
fronts. The cartoon insets depict the different patterns shown in
panels (a) to (c). The red dotted lines indicate the temperatures
at which the sketched patterns are observed, and the black dotted
lines serve as guides for the eye.
Pattern formation in
catalytic H2 oxidation on Rh(7
5 4) visualized by LEEM at constant pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar and pO2 = 5.0 × 10–7 mbar: (a) rotating double
spiral formed at 428 K. Catalytically inactive regions appear bright,
while active regions appear dark in the LEEM video frames (electron
energy 2.5 eV); (b) island-assisted front propagation at 433 K. The
inset in frame 2 shows a μ-LEED image taken from the same region
at E = 330 eV, the red dotted line illustrates the
spot splitting, and the yellow arrow shows the step direction. The
inset in frame 3 shows the corresponding surface structure; (c) collapse
of an oxygen island before it can coalesce with other islands at 468
K. The position of the hydrogen front is indicated in frames 1 and
2. The inset in frame 3 shows the intensity recorded in ROI A during
the kinetic transition, the time points corresponding to frames 1
and 3 are indicated, all frames in panel (c) are recorded at an electron
energy of 3.3 eV; (d) schematic illustration of the island-assisted
front propagation, each third corresponds to the black dotted rectangles
in frames 1–3 in panel (b); (e) schematic illustration of the
oxygen island collapse, ROIs 4 and 5 schematically represent the corresponding
ROIs in Figure b;
(f) local velocities of the hydrogen (crosses) and oxygen (circles)
fronts. The cartoon insets depict the different patterns shown in
panels (a) to (c). The red dotted lines indicate the temperatures
at which the sketched patterns are observed, and the black dotted
lines serve as guides for the eye.Figure b illustrates
the propagation of the oxygen front at 433 K, which proceeds in an
unusual way: ahead of the front, due to the anisotropy of the Rh(7
5 4) surface, plenty of elongated oxygen islands nucleate and grow
(frame 1 in Figure b), forming oxygen archipelagos ahead of the traveling front (frame
2). Eventually, the archipelagos conglomerate via the development
of dendritic structures and merge when the moving oxygen front reaches
the oxygen islands (frame 3). To our knowledge, such an island-assisted
propagation mechanism was not yet observed, neither in H2 oxidation nor in any other heterogeneous catalytic reaction. Each
nucleating island possesses its “local front” along
the island perimeter, propagating with its local velocity vloc, which is different from the effective velocity veff of
the mesoscopically observed front (without resolving the nucleating
islands). Figure d
shows a schematic drawing of this concept, where veff =
3·vloc by the formation of a singular island ahead
of the moving front. For the hydrogen front, such island-assisted
front propagation was not observed; therefore, veff is
equal to vloc for hydrogen.The unique ability of
the SMART microscope to directly correlate
the orientation of real space images (LEEM) with diffraction patterns
obtained for the reciprocal space (μ-LEED)[42,43] allows us to identify the preferential direction of the front propagation.
The latter appears to be along the [1 1 1]-type terraces of the stepped
Rh(7 5 4) surface, i.e., in the [1 3̅ 2]-direction, as illustrated
by the insets in Figure b (details of the crystallographic analysis and μ-LEED patterns
of the studied surface regions are given in the Supporting Information). Such preferential front propagation
along the terraces of stepped Rh surfaces was previously observed
in H2 oxidation and is caused by anisotropy of the diffusional
hydrogen supply along vs across the atomic steps.[19]At an even higher temperature of 468 K, kinetic transitions
to
the active state occur via fast “island-snapping” hydrogen
fronts (Figure c and
schematic illustration in Figure e) without island agglomeration. In video frames 1
and 2 of Figure c,
the fast front appears as a stripe and not as a line due to the blurring
caused by the exposure time of 2 s for each LEEM video frame. The
origin of such island-mediated transition lies in the subsurface oxygen
formation/depletion, which serves as a feedback and “clock”
mechanism governing the frequency of the self-sustained oscillations
in H2 oxidation on Rh.[13−16] At rising temperatures, the formation/depletion
of subsurface oxygen occurs faster and the clock frequency increases,
eventually leading to kinetic transitions within the growing oxygen
islands before they can coalesce with other islands. The LEEM videos
of the three different types of pattern formation at 428, 433, and
468 K are given in the Supporting Information. Such transitions can be registered even in PEEM as sawtooth-like
local oscillations (ROI 4 in Figure e).The sawtooth shape of the intensity curves,
shown in the inset
of frame 3 in Figure c, reflects the fast “avalanche-like” snapping of the
oxygen islands by hydrogen fronts and the following relatively slow
relaxation due to subsurface oxygen depletion, as schematically shown
in Figure e. The temperature
dependence of the local front velocities for oxygen and hydrogen is
displayed in Figure f. While the local hydrogen front velocity shows an exponential increase
with rising temperature, the local velocity of the oxygen front remains
approximately constant. The temperature-dependent differences in the
local velocities of reaction fronts during self-sustained oscillations
allow us to explain the formation of qualitatively different patterns
at different temperatures. At 428 K, the local velocities of hydrogen
and oxygen fronts are equal, which favors the formation of spiral
patterns,[48] as observed in the present
experiments (Figure a). At 433 K, the local hydrogen front is about two times faster
than the local oxygen front, which can only partially be compensated
by island-assisted propagation; thus, no spiral nuclei are formed
anymore,[49] favoring the island-assisted
oxygen front propagation in the form of a “frayed” inactive
area (frame 3 in Figure b). At 468 K, the discrepancy of local velocities appears to be too
high for the formation of a mesoscopic front: the growing oxygen islands
are “snapped” by fast island-internal hydrogen fronts
before they can merge. Therefore, mesoscopic fronts are not visible
in PEEM within ROI 3 in Figure despite plenty of local instabilities occurring on a smaller
length scale at the present conditions. Since the nucleation of oxygen
islands occurs most probably via reaction-induced fluctuations,[18] the nucleating/collapsing islands are stochastically
distributed over the surface, occasionally leaving space for regions
that also locally remain temporarily nonoscillating, as visible in
ROI 5 in Figure e.
Modeling
To rationalize the experimental findings and
to investigate the influence of differences between the front propagation
of hydrogen and oxygen on the observed pattern formation, theoretical
simulations were performed. Usually, a mean-field approach, which
ignores the nonideality of surface rate processes and the stochastic
components of adsorption, desorption, and reaction, is used for microkinetic
modeling of pattern formation. The alternative use of the Monte Carlo
method, which is superior for the simulation of pattern formation
on the nm scale,[11] is still a challenge
for simulation of patterns on the μm scale because of limitations
in lattice size, rate constants, and calculations of the elementary
steps of diffusion. Therefore, a novel model was developed based on
a hybrid approach of complementary microkinetic modeling (MKM) and
Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, with the goal of realistically describing
the experimental microscopy observations. The Langmuir–Hinshelwood
mechanism that is well established for catalytic hydrogen oxidation
and the formation and depletion of subsurface oxygen as feedback mechanism
of the oscillations were assumed. The calculations provide the time-dependent
spatial distribution of the catalytically active and inactive states
and, thus, allow monitoring the simulated pattern formation, in a
kind of virtual reaction microscopy.In the MC calculations,
a hexagonal tiling MC-grid consisting of 160 000 tiles corresponding
to a 40 × 34.6 μm2 area of the sample surface
was used. A simplified MC approach was chosen, where the state of
each of the tiles is either catalytically active (low O and H coverage)
or catalytically inactive (high O coverage). Transitions between these
states occur via two possible pathways: internally, by local oxygen
or hydrogen adsorption, which is mediated by the local Osub concentration, or externally, via reaction/diffusion fronts propagating
from neighboring grid points. These events are governed by MC, while
MKM is used to determine the local probabilities for each event to
occur and to calculate the formation/depletion of Osub based
on the current local coverages (details of the calculations are given
in the Supporting Information).Simulations
were performed for the same partial pressures of reactants
as used in the experiment (pH2 = 4.5 ×
10–7 mbar and pO2 =
5.0 × 10–7 mbar), only varying the temperature.
For all calculations, the same set of MKM parameters was used (details
are given in the Supporting Information). Results of the simulations are displayed in Figure . Figure a shows the formation of patterns at T = 428 K, where characteristic double spirals are formed. Both hydrogen
and oxygen fronts propagate with the same velocity. The simulations
closely mirror the pattern formation observed in the experiment at
the same temperature (Figure a).
Figure 5
Virtual reaction microscopy of catalytic H2 oxidation
on Rh at constant pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar and pO2 = 5.0 ×
10–7 mbar: (a) calculated pattern formation at 428
K. Catalytically active regions (low hydrogen and oxygen coverage)
are colored blue, and catalytically inactive regions (oxygen-covered)
are colored red. A double spiral is recognizably formed in the middle
of the image; (b) island-assisted front propagation at 433 K: the
white dotted line marks the main front position, the inset in frame
3 shows a part of the hexagonal tiling MC-grid; (c) simulation results
at 468 K: the oxygen islands are snapped by hydrogen fronts (white
dotted line) before the islands can grow together.
Virtual reaction microscopy of catalytic H2 oxidation
on Rh at constant pH2 = 4.5 × 10–7 mbar and pO2 = 5.0 ×
10–7 mbar: (a) calculated pattern formation at 428
K. Catalytically active regions (low hydrogen and oxygen coverage)
are colored blue, and catalytically inactive regions (oxygen-covered)
are colored red. A double spiral is recognizably formed in the middle
of the image; (b) island-assisted front propagation at 433 K: the
white dotted line marks the main front position, the inset in frame
3 shows a part of the hexagonal tiling MC-grid; (c) simulation results
at 468 K: the oxygen islands are snapped by hydrogen fronts (white
dotted line) before the islands can grow together.At 433 K, hydrogen fronts propagate much faster,
but oxygen fronts
keep their velocity which is now about one-third of that of hydrogen.
The simulations predict the formation and growth of additional small
oxygen islands ahead of the main front in the right lower corner of
frame 1 (Figure b).
Eventually, the main oxygen front fuses with these islands (frames
2 and 3). Incorporation of islands contributes to the oxygen front
propagation, thus increasing the effective front velocity, which therefore
approaches the hydrogen front velocity. Indeed, such a front propagation
mechanism was exactly observed in the experiments as island-assisted
front propagation (Figure b,d).When increasing the temperature parameter to 468
K, where the hydrogen
front is about 2 orders of magnitude faster than the oxygen front,
the calculations provide a very different behavior (Figure c). Oxygen islands slowly grow
until, eventually, one nucleation spot, preferentially at the edge
of the island, spontaneously undergoes a sudden transition to the
active state, forming a fast hydrogen front that “devours”
the whole oxygen island, preventing the fusion with other islands.
Again, the calculations reproduce the specific experimentally observed
behavior at the same conditions well (Figure c,e).Since the size of the MC-grid
and the dimensions of each grid tile
can be chosen arbitrarily, both the size of the field of view and
the time interval between calculated images are not limited. This
allows calculating a stack of surface snapshots (exemplary presented
in Figure ), which
can be assembled to a virtual video file (calculated videos are given
in the Supporting Information). By convoluting
the adsorbate concentrations with a proper contrast mechanism, different
imaging modes can be simulated without experimental limitations, such
as the size of the field of view or the duration of the experiment.
Additionally, such calculated virtual reaction microscopy videos can
be processed using the same tools, which are applied to experimental
video data complementing the insights into the observed phenomena.[17,37,50]
Conclusions
In conclusion, we have performed a microscopic
study of pattern
formation in H2 oxidation on Rh using PEEM, LEEM, and XPEEM
in a correlative microscopy approach, taking up important challenges
in studying this catalytic surface reaction. Due to their significantly
higher lateral resolution, LEEM and XPEEM allowed zooming in on processes
observed by PEEM, enabling the detection of an unusual island-mediated
oxygen front propagation during kinetic transitions. To rationalize
the experimental findings, theoretical simulations were performed
using a novel model based on a hybrid approach of microkinetic modeling
and Monte Carlo, which allows us to realistically simulate the spatio-temporal
surface processes in a kind of virtual reaction microscopy on realistic
length and time scales. The results of the calculations agree well
with the experimental observations and provide novel insights into
the mechanism of pattern formation in catalytic hydrogen oxidation
on platinum group metals.
Authors: Pascal D Odermatt; Arun Shivanandan; Hendrik Deschout; Radek Jankele; Adrian P Nievergelt; Lely Feletti; Michael W Davidson; Aleksandra Radenovic; Georg E Fantner Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2015-07-06 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Y Suchorski; J Zeininger; S Buhr; M Raab; M Stöger-Pollach; J Bernardi; H Grönbeck; G Rupprechter Journal: Science Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Yuri Suchorski; Martin Datler; Ivan Bespalov; Johannes Zeininger; Michael Stöger-Pollach; Johannes Bernardi; Henrik Grönbeck; Günther Rupprechter Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-02-09 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Joel E Schmidt; Xinwei Ye; Ilse K van Ravenhorst; Ramon Oord; David A Shapiro; Young-Sang Yu; Simon R Bare; Florian Meirer; Jonathan D Poplawsky; Bert M Weckhuysen Journal: ChemCatChem Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 5.686