Electron Diffraction

Quantum Physics
Student Notes

S KILLS G AINED A SSUMED K NOWLEDGE

§ General lab safety § Basics of Quantum Mechanics
§ Using Vernier Calipers § Basics of Interference and diffraction
§ How to work safely with high voltages.
§ How to work safely with evacuated § Knowledge of the Bragg X-ray
glass containers diffraction experiment and ability to use
the Bragg equation.

1 Experimental aim
To demonstrate the wave properties of electrons by observing the diffraction of an electron
beam from a polycrystalline layer of graphite. The specific aim of this experiment is to
calculate the lattice spacing in graphite from the diameter of the interference rings and the
electron accelerating voltage.

2 Background
In 1925, French physicist Louis de Broglie, a graduate student at that time, showed that
matter also has a wave nature as well as a particle nature. de Broglie developed his theory
of particle-wave duality of matter in 1924, for his PhD dissertation. Matter was previously
seen as consisting of particles, such as electrons and protons, characterised by particle
properties, energy (E) and momentum (p). Einstein’s new paradigm suggested additional
wave properties, such as frequency ν and wavelength λ. Louis de Broglie’s equation
connects the wave and particle aspects:
h
λ= (7.1)
p
where h = 6.625 × 10-34 J.s is Planck’s constant. There is a short and easy to follow
commentary by P. Weinberger revisiting de Broglie’s 1924 paper in the Philosophical
Magazine [1]. It is well worth reading before doing this experiment, if you have time.
This work won de Broglie the Nobel Prize in 1929, after his work was experimentally verified
by the US physicists Clinton J. Davisson and Lester H. Germer. In 1927 Davisson and
Germer first observed the diffraction and interference of electrons (particles) scattered from
a nickel target. This discovery happened by accident: the nickel target had crystallised after
heating was used to remove the oxide coating and the atomic planes of nickel crystal
provided a natural diffraction grating, with the separation of the planes in the crystal being of
order of the wavelength of the scattered electrons. The scattered electron intensity was
found to be a function of the scattering angle. This phenomenon is analogous to the “Bragg
[Experiment #] Electron Diffraction PHYS2111

reflections”, which occur when X-rays (waves) are scattered from the atomic planes of a
crystal (see Figure 1).
The Bragg condition for constructive interference gives maxima at:

2d sin θ = nλ (n = 1, 2 ....) (7.2)

where d is the spacing between the planes of the carbon atoms and θ is the Bragg angle
(angle between electron beam and lattice planes), and n refers to the order of diffraction
(Figure 1).
€

Figure 1: This diagram illustrates how Bragg reflections arise when X-rays scattered off different
planes in a crystal interfere to produce an interference pattern. X-rays are waves, but the
Davisson-Germer experiment reproduced something similar with an electron beam illuminating
a crystal, and the Davisson-Germer experiment also satisfies the Bragg equation (7.2).

An electron beam with de Broglie wavelength λ is reflected in accordance with Bragg

equation (7.2), and you will need this equation in your analysis. In the Davisson-Germer
experiment, the electron wavelength was calculated from the location of minima and maxima
in the diffraction pattern, and it agreed with the de Broglie equation (7.1).

(a) (b)

Figure 2: (a) The Debye-Scherrer-Hull technique for diffracting beams of X-rays, electrons or neutrons
The crystalline film is consists of powdered crystals with random orientations, equivalent to a two-
dimensional diffraction grating, as discussed by Hull [2]. (b) The diffraction pattern from polycrystalline
gold foil (from Eisberg & Resnick, Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, etc, Wiley 1985).

v1.3.0, Last Modified: 27 March 2019 by MCBA Page 2 of 6

[Experiment #] Electron Diffraction PHYS2111

In 1928 G.P. Thomson (son of J.J. Thomson, who discovered that electrons are particles)
also observed diffraction patterns when an electron beam passed through polycrystalline
gold foil. His experiment was similar to the Debye-Scherrer-Hull technique: a polycrystalline
powder provides a two-dimensional lattice that diffracts X rays, electrons or neutrons into the
form of a cone (Figure 2). This technique is often called Powder Diffraction, as opposed to
the Single Crystal Diffraction of the Davisson-Germer experiment. Powder Diffraction is what
you will be doing in this experiment. As mentioned above, de Broglie was awarded the Nobel
Prize in 1929, while Davisson and Thomson (heads of their groups) shared the Prize in
1937.
Nowadays the electron diffraction technique is used widely in crystallography to study new
materials.

2.1 Quantitative information on how the experiment works

The momentum of an electron with kinetic energy KE can be calculated from the velocity v
that the electrons acquire under the acceleration voltage Ua (Figure 3):
1 p2
KE = mv 2 = = eU a (7.3)
2 2m
where m is the rest mass of the electron, 9.109 × 10-31 kg, and e is the electronic charge
1.6 × 10-19 C. For the accelerating voltages used, the relativistic mass of the electron can be
replaced by the rest mass with an error of only 0.5 %.

Figure 3: Set-up and beam geometry for the electron beam

tube.
Using Equations 7.1 and 7.3 we can calculate the de Broglie wavelength λ:
h
λ= (7.4)
2meU a
The electron beam with de Broglie wavelength λ is reflected in accordance with the Bragg
condition, shown in Figure 1 and given in Equation 7.2. In this experiment the electrons
scatter from a powder of polycrystalline graphite (see Figure 2). It is composed of many
small crystals, crystallites, with random orientation to each other. When the electron beam
strikes such a polycrystalline target, some of the crystallites will have the atomic planes in
the “correct” orientation and reflect the electrons. The electron beam is therefore spread out
in the form of a cone, producing interference maxima on the phosphorescent screen in the
form of concentric rings around the centre (Figure 2).

v1.3.0, Last Modified: 27 March 2019 by MCBA Page 3 of 6

[Experiment #] Electron Diffraction PHYS2111

The two first order interference rings occur through reflection from the lattice planes of
spacing d1 and d2 (Figure 4b). Constructive interference results for the beams scattered from
the neighboring atomic planes when the rays are in phase (the difference in path length is a
whole number of wavelengths).

(a) (b)

Figure 4: (a) Crystal lattice of graphite, and (b) graphite planes for the first two interference rings.

The Bragg angle θ can be calculated from the radius of the interference ring, but it should be
remembered that the angle of deviation α (Figure 3) is twice as great:
α = 2θ (7.6)
From Figure 3:
r
sin 2α = (7.7)
R
where R ≈ 65 mm is the radius of the spherical surface of the glass tube.
Using the trigonometric identity, sin2α = 2sinαcosα and an approximation for small angle α
(cos10o = 0.985): sin2α ≈ 2sinα:
€
r
sin α = (7.8)
2R
For the small angles θ we obtain sinα = sin2θ = 2sinθ:
r
€ sin θ = (7.9)
4R
With this approximation and using (7.5) we obtain:
2R
€ r= nλ
d (7.10)
With n = 1, 2, 3 …

2.2 Useful links: €

• Physclips: Diffraction, including electron diffraction.
• The page from some University College London Chemistry notes gives an excellent
description of powder diffraction, which is what you will be doing for this experiment,
works: http://pd.chem.ucl.ac.uk/pdnn/diff2/kinemat2.htm.

v1.3.0, Last Modified: 27 March 2019 by MCBA Page 4 of 6

[Experiment #] Electron Diffraction PHYS2111

3 Prework
3.1 Theoretical prework
1. Does the particle-wave duality apply to all particles? Calculate λ of a pitched baseball
with mass m = 0.15 kg and velocity v = 60m/s. What can you conclude from the result?
2. Calculate λ of 7.0 kV electrons and compare it to the wavelength range of visible light.
What is the advantage of an electron microscope compared to a microscope that uses
visible light?
3. The operating instructions for this experiment also contain some theory, introduced as
necessary while talking about the equipment you will be using, and how to operate it. At
this stage, consult both these notes and the operating instructions (Section 2.2) for this
experiment, and using Equations 7.1 – 7.10, derive the relationship between the radii of
the rings r1 and r2 and the accelerating potential Ua. Explain how you can obtain the
principal spacings of the graphite lattice, d1 and d2, from a plot of r1, r2 and Ua.

3.2 Experimental plan

Now you get to undertake this Nobel Prize winning experiment in the Second Year Physics
Laboratory. The Operating Instructions for this experiment give you the information you need
to undertake the experiment.
What you are required to do is briefly outlined here:
• Go to the Operating Instructions for this experiment, and take careful note of how to
keep both yourself and the equipment safe (Section 1) while making your
experimental measurements. This experiment involves both high voltages and
equipment that is easily damaged.
• Read Section 2.1: The experimental setup carefully, and follow all instructions.
• Work through Section 2.2: Quantitative information on how the experiment works.
You will already have done this in Prework question 3, but now do this again with the
equipment in front of you.
• Make your measurements and produce appropriate graphs and analysis to extract
the key lattice parameters for graphite.

4 Analysis and Discussion

§ You may wish to compare your experimental results with known values from the
literature (we will let you find them yourself, be sure to cite your source) and discuss
any deviations between your measurements and literature values.
§ You might like to consider the implications of the 10 Mohm resistor that is in series
with the high voltage power supply (see Figure 3). It is possible to graph the data in
such a way as to make the effect of this resistor clear.
§ You might also compare the range of electron wavelengths with d1 and d2. Can you
explain why at some values of Ua the electrons behaved as particles, while at others
the electrons behaved as waves?
§ In your analysis, you should consider the effects of accelerating voltage on electron
wavelength, and at the least, aim to obtain d1 and d2 for graphite. Would you expect
more accurate results for a higher accelerating voltage or a lower accelerating
voltage?

v1.3.0, Last Modified: 27 March 2019 by MCBA Page 5 of 6

[Experiment #] Electron Diffraction PHYS2111

5 Conclusions
Write a conclusion to your experimental report. In dot points summarize briefly your main
findings, especially with regard to how well the experiment demonstrated the wave nature of
electrons.

6 Background References
[1] Weinberger, P. 2006. Philosophical Magazine Letters, Vol. 86, No. 7, July 2006, 405-
410. You can it find at http://www.cms.tuwien.ac.at/media/pdf/publications/PML-86-405-
2006.pdf

[2] In Prince, E. 2004. International Tables for Crystallography, Mathematical, Physical and
Chemical Tables, Chapter 2, Section 2.3, p42 (view online at:
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=60FoFEGyShIC&pg=PA43&lpg=PA43&dq=Deby
e-Hull-
Scherrer+technique&source=bl&ots=u16kJky_gq&sig=VAOdNaYIf2piTnBq03SIhen2jdM
&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi8o7fBgavLAhUFpZQKHbUVCOcQ6AEIPTAG#v=onepag
e&q=Debye-Hull-Scherrer%20technique&f=false).

v1.3.0, Last Modified: 27 March 2019 by MCBA Page 6 of 6