Materials Chemistry at High Temperatures 1990
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4612-0481-7_29
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Knudsen Effusion Mass Spectrometric Determination of Metal Hydroxide Stabilities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
10
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
4
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The error bars are based on the convergence properties observed for approach I using the DEA asymptote, the magnitude of the basis set superposition error (see Computational Details), as well as an uncertainty of 0.03 eV in the estimate of relativistic effects. The value for chromium hydroxide agrees well with the most recent experimental estimate, by Gorokhov et al at 3.86 ± 0.15 eV. When our computed value of IP(CrOH) at 7.54 ± 0.05 eV is combined with experimental values of the bond dissociation energy in the chromium hydroxide cation, two further experimental estimates of D 0 (Cr−OH) are obtained as 3.95 ± 0.23 and 4.00 ± 0.14 eV.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The error bars are based on the convergence properties observed for approach I using the DEA asymptote, the magnitude of the basis set superposition error (see Computational Details), as well as an uncertainty of 0.03 eV in the estimate of relativistic effects. The value for chromium hydroxide agrees well with the most recent experimental estimate, by Gorokhov et al at 3.86 ± 0.15 eV. When our computed value of IP(CrOH) at 7.54 ± 0.05 eV is combined with experimental values of the bond dissociation energy in the chromium hydroxide cation, two further experimental estimates of D 0 (Cr−OH) are obtained as 3.95 ± 0.23 and 4.00 ± 0.14 eV.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Note that if our preliminary value of 3.79 ± 0.12 eV is lowered by the Fe + ( 4 F) excitation energy of 0.30 eV, the resulting value is in good agreement with this recommendation. Further, Schröder and Schwarz [63] cite several other experimental values, including 3.17 ± 0.13 eV [65], 3.3 ± 0.2 eV [65], 3.34 ± 0.26 eV [66], and 3.9 ± 0.3 eV [67]. None of these seems particularly definitive, but the latter three values are all within the combined experimental error of 3.57 ± 0.14 eV.…”
Section: Appendix a Implications For The Bond Energy Of Feoh +mentioning
confidence: 88%
“…These observations confirm the results of other authors who have predicted the presence of some of these species by thermodynamic calculations. [19][20][21][22][23] Under these conditions of oxidation no evidence was found of the presence of CrO 2 OH(g) and CrO 2 (OH) 2 (g), which had been reported by other authors as the dominant oxyhydroxide vapor species. [8][9][10] The result of the thermogravimetric study of this sample of Cr in Ar + 80% H 2 O at 650°C is shown in Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 81%