Diffraction of electrons by a polycrystalline lattice

(Debye-Scherrer diffraction)
1 Objectives
• to prove wave property of electrons;
• verification of the de Broglie’s equation;
• determination of lattice plane spacings of graphite.

2 Principle
Fast electrons are diffracted from a polycrystalline layer of graphite: in-
terference rings appear on a fluorescent screen. The phenomenon is similar
to the Debye-Scherrer diffraction of x-rays by a crystalline powder. The in-
terplanar spacing in graphite is determined from the relationship between
the diameter of the diffraction ring and the accelerating voltage.

3 Theory
After the publication of Einstein’s explanation of the photoelectric effect
(1905), it was clear that light has a dual nature: previously thought of as a
wave, it exhibits particle-like properties in the photoelectric effect. In 1924
Louis de Broglie put forward the following hypothesis: material particles,
just like photons, can have a wave-like behaviour. The wavelength associated
with a material particle of momentum p is
λ = h/p, (1)
where h is Planck’s constant. This wavelength is nowadays called de Broglie
wavelength.
We expect interference and diffraction effects with matter waves when
these waves pass through apertures or slits with dimensions comparable with
the de Broglie wavelength. For a macroscopic particle of say, m = 1 kg and
speed v = 1 m/s, the de Broglie wavelength is λ ≈ 6.6 × 10−34 m, which is
many orders of magnitude smaller than any imaginable aperture. To reach
much larger de Broglie wavelengths, waves associated to microparticles were
investigated. If electrons are considered, they are first accelerated under
a voltage. The linear momentum of a non-relativistic electron accelerated
under a voltage U is obtained from the equation
p2/2m = eU, (2)

1
 n λ = 2d sinϑ

ϑ ϑ Fig. 1 Schematic representation of the

Bragg condition. Note that the angle
formed by an incident ray and the reflected
one is 2θ.
∆1 ∆2
d

where m denotes the electron mass and e is the elementary charge. The de
Broglie wavelength [see Eq. (1)] of the electron is
h
λ= √ . (3)
2meU
For example, if the accelerating voltage is of 4 kV, one can associate to the
electrons a wavelength of about 20 pm.
To understand in what conditions the electron can present a wave-like
behaviour, let us first discuss W.L. Bragg work (1912) on the x-rays diffrac-
tion by a crystal. The regular arrangement of atoms in a crystal can be
understood as an array of lattice elements on parallel lattice planes. When
such a crystal lattice is exposed to monochromatic x-rays, then each element
in a lattice plane acts as a scattering point at which a spherical wavelet
forms. According to Huygens’ principle, these spherical wavelets are su-
perposed to create a reflected wave front. In this model, the wavelength
remains unchanged with respect to the incident wave front, and the radia-
tion directions which are perpendicular to the two wave fronts fulfil the laws
of refection from optics. Constructive interference arises in the neighbour-
ing rays reflected at the individual lattice planes when their path differences
∆ = ∆1 + ∆2 = 2d sin θ are integer multiples of the wavelength λ (Fig. 1):

2d sin θ = nλ, n = 1, 2, . . . , (4)

where d is the lattice plane spacing and θ is the diffraction angle (glancing
angle). This equation is known as Bragg condition.
When de Broglie wavelength associated to an electron is comparable
with the spacing of atoms in a crystal lattice, electrons are expected to be
diffracted by crystal lattices. This idea was confirmed experimentally in 1927
by C. Davisson and L. Germer, and independently by G.P. Thomson.
In the present experiment the wave character of electrons is demonstrated
by their diffraction by a polycrystalline lattice (Debye-Scherrer diffraction)
of graphite. The polycrystalline lattice is made up of a large number of
small single crystallites which are irregularly arranged in space. As a result

2
 Fig. 2 Ring pattern which surround a central
spot on the screen at the diffraction of electrons
on graphite. Two rings with diameters D1 (in-
ner green ring) and D2 (outer green ring) are
observed corresponding to diffraction of order 1
at the lattice plane spacings d1 = 0.213 nm and
d2 = 0.123 nm, respectively.

d1

d2 Fig. 3 Lattice plane spacings in graphite with

effects observable in this experiment: d1 =
0.213 nm and d2 = 0.123 nm.

there are always some crystallites where the Bragg condition is satisfied for
a given direction of incidence and wavelength. The reflections produced by
these crystallites lie on cones whose common axis is given by the direction of
incidence and apex on the graphite sample. Concentric circles thus appear
on a fluorescent screen located perpendicularly to the direction of incidence
(Fig. 2). The lattice planes which are responsable for the electron diffraction
pattern obtained with this setup possess spacings given in Fig. 3.
Figure 4 shows the geometry of the electron diffraction. The distance
from the graphite foil and screen is L, 2θ is the angle between the direction
of the incident beam and the reflected one for a constructive interference,

L Fig. 4 Electron diffraction tube

sketch for determining the diffrac-
tion angle at constructive interfer-
F2 ence. The distance between the
2ϑ
D graphite foil and screen is L =
F1 13.5 cm. F1 , F2 = sockets for cath-
C X A
ode heating; C = cathode cap; X =
focusing electrode; A = anode (with
100 k
U polycrystalline graphite foil in the
centre).

3
and D is the diameter of the ring. We have
D/2 D
tan 2θ = = . (5)
L 2L
In the approximation of small angles
tan 2θ ≈ 2θ ≈ 2 sin θ (6)
the equation reads
D
2 sin θ =
2L
. (7)
The substitution of Eq. (7) in Eq. (4) leads in first order diffraction (n = 1)
to
D
λ=d .
2L
(8)
This equation allows the determination of the electron wavelength based an
the knowledge of the lattice plane spacing d and the measurement of the
diameter D of the ring. This value can be compared with the value from
Eq. (3).
Suppose now the measurements are designed for the determination of the
lattice plane spacings. Equating the wavelengths from Eq. (3) and Eq. (8),
the dependence of the diameter of a ring on the voltage is
1
D = k√ , (9)
U
where √
2Lh
k= √ .
d me
(10)
Measuring the diameters D1 and D2 as function
√ of the accelerating voltage
U , there are plotted D1 and D2 versus 1/ U . The slopes are determined by
linear fits through the origin and the lattice plane spacings are calculated by
formula √
2Lh
d= √ . (11)
k me

4 Experimental set-up and procedure

The experimental set-up is shown in Fig. 5; it contains the following
parts:
• electron diffraction tube (see also Fig. 4);

• tube stand;
• high-voltage power supply 10 kV;
4
 Fig. 5 Experimental set-up for electron diffraction by graphite.

• safety connection leads;

• vernier calipers or ruler.
The wiring diagram is presented in Fig. 6:
• Connect the cathode heating sockets F1 and F2 of the tube stand to
the output on the back of the high-voltage power supply 10 kV;
• Connect the sockets C (cathode cap) and X (focusing electrode) of the
tube stand to the negative pole;
• Connect the socket A (anode) to the positive pole of the 5 kV/2 mA
output of the high-voltage power supply 10 kV;
• Ground the positive pole on the high-voltage power supply 10 kV.
Safety note : The electron diffraction tube is a thin-walled, evacuated
glass bulb. There is danger of implosion. Do not subject the tube to me-
chanical stress.
5
 A
F1 F2
X C

F1 F2

6.3 V~ / 2 A

F1, F2
Fig. 6 Experimental setup (wiring
C
diagram) for observing the electron
diffraction by graphite.
kV 0...max.

0...5V

0...5kV 0...5kV

- max.100 µA + - max.2 mA +

521 70

5 Carrying out the experiment

1. Plug in the high-voltage power supply and turn it on from the switch
located on the back of the power supply.
2. Adjust the voltage from the knob located on the upper right corner.
Measurements of the diameters D1 and D2 will be performed from 3.0 kV
to 5.0 kV in 0.5 kV increments. Measure the diameter to the centre (the
brightest spot) of the diffuse ring. While reading the scale, eye must be
placed vertically above the scale mark being read to minimize parallax errors.
3. Turning off: slowly turn down the voltage to zero and then turn off
the power supply; unplug the power supply.
Note : The bright spot in the middle of the screen may damage the flu-
orescent layer. Reduce the high-voltage to zero when no measurements are
made.

6 Experimental data and data processing

Table 1 Measured diameters D1 and D2 of the concentric diffraction rings as
function of the accelerating voltage U .
U /kV D1 /cm D2 /cm
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00

6
a. Verification of the de Broglie’s equation
1. Calculate the wavelengths λ1 and λ2 [see Eq. (8)] derived from the
Bragg condition for each voltage in the table of data:
D1 D2
λ1 = d1 and λ2 = d2 ,
2L 2L
where the distance between the graphite foil and screen is L = 13.5 cm and
the lattice plane spacings are d1 = 0.213 nm and d2 = 0.123 nm.
2. Calculate the wavelength λ [see Eq. (3)] derived from de Broglie
hypothesis for each voltage in the table of data.
3. Present the results of the previous calculations in a table with the
table head U , λ1 , λ2 and λ. Comments. Is de Broglie’s equation valid?
b. Determination of lattice plane spacings of graphite
√ √
1. Plot the experimental data D1 versus 1/ U and D2 versus 1/ U on
the same coordinate axes.
2. Fit the dependencies by straight lines passing through the origin (see
the Appendix). Denote k1 and k2 the slopes; denote ∆k1 and ∆k2 the
estimated standard deviations in the slopes.
3. Calculate d1 and d2 by use of Eq. (11), where k is substituted by k1
and k2.
4. Use ∆k1 and ∆k2 to calculate the estimated standard deviations in
d1 and d2 , respectively. Follow through the analysis carefully, and be sure to
use the correct procedure as you change the estimated standard deviation in
1/d to that in d.
5. Write the final results (best estimate ± estimated standard deviation)
and compare the experimental values for the spacings to the accepted values.

Useful physical constants:

h = 6.626 070 15 × 10−34 J Hz−1
e = 1.602 176 634 × 10−19 C
m = 9.109 383 7015(28) × 10−31 kg

7
Appendix: The linear dependence of two quantities
experimentally measured
Let us consider two quantities x and y that are related through the
mathematical formula
y = ax. (12)
There are performed n measurements (n ∼ 10) of pairs of values x and y
(x1 , y1 ), (x2 , y2 ), . . . , (xn , yn ) (13)
in order to determine the parameter a.
We limit ourselves to the simplifying conditions:
• measurements of equal weights;
• errors only when measuring the quantity y ; from an experimental
viewpoint, this means that the quantity x is measured much more
precisely than the quantity y.
In the plot y versus x, the deviation of the point (xi , yi ) from the straight
line y = ax is |axi − yi |. The best estimation of parameter a is taken the
one that minimizes the sum of squares of the deviations from the line,
X
n
(axi − yi )2 .
i=1

The best estimate of a is Pn

xi y i
a = Pi=1
n 2 (14)
i=1 xi
and the estimate of its standard deviation, ∆a, is given by
Pn
1 (ax − y )2
2
(∆a) = Pn i 2 i .
i=1
(15)
n−1 i=1 xi