Terbium

View Categories

Terbium

5 min read

Orbitals and Energies #

Note – these are listed in BINDING ENERGY

 

Tb 3d ≈ 1240 eV

Tb 4s ≈ 400 eV

Tb 4p ≈ 280 eV

Tb 4d ≈ 150 eV

Tb 5s ≈ 440 eV

Tb 5p ≈ 26 eV

Tb 4f ≈ 3 eV

Doublet Separations #

Tb 3d = 32 eV

Common Overlaps for Tb 3d #

I 3p – Pr 3p – Au NOO (Al Ka X-rays)K LMM (Al Ka X-rays)C KLL (Al Ka X-rays)

Auger Energies #

Note – these are listed in KINETIC ENERGY

 

Tb MNN ≈ 930 eV

Common Binding Energies – Tb 3d #

Species #

B.E. / eV #

Charge Ref #

Reference #

Theory and Background #

Tb³⁺: 4f⁸ ground-state configuration, typical for Tb₂O₃.

Tb⁴⁺: 4f⁷ (half-filled shell, analogous to Gd³⁺), seen in TbO₂ and Tb₄O₇.

Because Tb can stabilise both +3 and +4, XPS is used routinely to check oxidation state in mixed oxides.

Strong 3d–4f exchange leads to rich multiplet splitting in both 3d₅/₂ and 3d₃/₂.

Charge-transfer satellites are significant, particularly in Tb oxides; they appear several eV above the main peaks.

Lifetime broadening differs between 3d₅/₂ and 3d₃/₂ due to multiplet term-dependent widths.

Experimental Advice #

Prolonged X-ray exposure can induce gradual reduction of Tb⁴⁺ to Tb³⁺, especially in thin films and nanoparticles. Minimise dwell times and monitor sequential scans for spectral changes.

Tb metal oxidises quickly in air, forming Tb₂O₃ and Tb(OH)₃ at the surface.

For Tb⁴⁺ compounds (e.g. TbO₂), surface reduction to Tb³⁺ is common under ambient exposure. Samples should be prepared/transferred under inert atmosphere or measured quickly after preparation.

Data Analysis Guidance #

In Tb³⁺ spectra, the multiplet envelope is broad and asymmetric, making simple peak models insufficient.

In Tb⁴⁺ spectra (TbO₂), the pattern looks more like Gd³⁺ (because of the 4f⁷ half-filled shell). This provides a useful cross-check for assignments.

Reference Datasets #

 

Coming soon

References #

  1. Islam, M. J., et al. (2020). “The effect of metal precursor on copper phase dispersion and nanoparticle formation for the catalytic transformations of furfural.” Applied Catalysis B: Environmental: 119062. Read it online here.
  2. Miller, A. and G. Simmons (1993). “Copper by XPS.” Surface Science Spectra 2(1): 55-60. Read it online here.
  3. Vasquez, R. (1998). “Cu2O by XPS.” Surface Science Spectra 5(4): 257-261. Read it online here.
  4. Vasquez, R. (1998). “CuO by XPS.” Surface Science Spectra 5(4): 262-266. Read it online here.
  5. Biesinger, M. C. (2017). “Advanced analysis of copper X‐ray photoelectron spectra.” Surface and interface analysis 49(13): 1325-1334. Read it online here.
  6. Thøgersen, A., et al. (2008). “An experimental study of charge distribution in crystalline and amorphous Si nanoclusters in thin silica films.” Journal of Applied Physics 103(2): 024308. Read it online here.
  7. Moretti, G. (1998). “Auger parameter and Wagner plot in the characterization of chemical states by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy: a review.” Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena 95(2-3): 95-144. Read it online here.
  8. Batista, J., et al. (2001). “On the structural characteristics of γ-alumina-supported Pd–Cu bimetallic catalysts.” Applied Catalysis A: General 217(1-2): 55-68. Read it online here.
  9. Ghijsen, Jacques, et al. “Electronic structure of Cu 2 O and CuO.” Physical Review B 38.16 (1988): 11322. Read it online here.