4.7 Article

Oxygen vacancy migration in ceria and Pr-doped ceria: A DFT plus U study

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 132, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.3327684

关键词

cerium compounds; density functional theory; diffusion; ionic conductivity; praseodymium; total energy; vacancies (crystal)

资金

  1. Department of Energy [DE-PS02-06ER0617]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oxygen vacancy formation and migration in ceria (CeO2) is central to its performance as an ionic conductor. It has been observed that ceria doped with suitable aliovalent cationic dopants improves its ionic conductivity. To investigate this phenomenon, we present total energy calculations within the framework of density functional theory to study oxygen vacancy migration in ceria and Pr-doped ceria (PDC). We report activation energies for oxygen vacancy formation and migration in undoped ceria and for different migration pathways in PDC. The activation energy value for oxygen vacancy migration in undoped ceria was found to be in reasonable agreement with the available experimental and theoretical results. Conductivity values for reduced undoped ceria calculated using theoretical activation energy and attempt frequency were found in reasonably good agreement with the experimental data. For PDC, oxygen vacancy formation and migration were investigated at first, second, and third nearest neighbor positions to a Pr ion. The second nearest neighbor site is found to be the most favorable vacancy formation site. Vacancy migration between first, second, and third nearest neighbors was calculated (nine possible jumps), with activation energies ranging from 0.41 to 0.78 eV for first-nearest-neighbor jumps. Overall, the presence of Pr significantly affects vacancy formation and migration, in a complex manner requiring the investigation of many different migration events. We propose a relationship illuminating the role of additional dopants toward lowering the activation energy for vacancy migration in PDC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据