Slope selection of mounds with permeable steps in homoepitaxy

Korutcheva, Elka; Koroutchev, Kostadin; Markov, Ivan

doi:10.1140/epjb/e2012-30884-4

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another exception is when just h+ = 0 since δ+ = ∞ (infinite Ehrlich-Schwoebel barrier) and thus K+ = 0 (or just h-= 0 since δ-= ∞ so K-= 0). Now P = 0 and again (14) reduces to a single relation for a single non-zero K [18].…”

Section: E Discrete 2d Dde Model: Extraction Of K ± and Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Once the averaged fluxes, <J ± >, and the averaged densities, <n ± >, are determined from analysis of the 2D DDE model, (14) for uniform deposition only yields two relations for three quantities. Consequently, K ± and P cannot be uniquely determined in this way.…”

Section: E Discrete 2d Dde Model: Extraction Of K ± and Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, K ± and P cannot be uniquely determined in this way. One exception to this scenario is when the steps have symmetric attachment barriers (or no attachment barriers), and as a consequence one has <n+> = <n-> so the permeability term is absent in (14). Then <J+> = <J-> and K = K+ = K-is determined from the single relation (14) which becomes <J ± > = a -2 K <δn ± >, but here P is still undetermined [18].…”

Section: E Discrete 2d Dde Model: Extraction Of K ± and Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One exception to this scenario is when the steps have symmetric attachment barriers (or no attachment barriers), and as a consequence one has <n+> = <n-> so the permeability term is absent in (14). Then <J+> = <J-> and K = K+ = K-is determined from the single relation (14) which becomes <J ± > = a -2 K <δn ± >, but here P is still undetermined [18]. Another exception is when just h+ = 0 since δ+ = ∞ (infinite Ehrlich-Schwoebel barrier) and thus K+ = 0 (or just h-= 0 since δ-= ∞ so K-= 0).…”

Section: E Discrete 2d Dde Model: Extraction Of K ± and Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous BCF type analyses incorporating step permeability have explored the transition to step flow [8] and step bunching or step instability on vicinal surfaces [3,9,10,11] during deposition. Other studies have explored the effect of permeability on second-layer nucleation during deposition [12,13], and on mound slope selection during unstable multilayer film growth [14]. In addition, the influence of permeability on post-deposition mound decay has been analyzed [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Permeability and kinetic coefficients for mesoscale BCF surface step dynamics: Discrete two-dimensional deposition-diffusion equation analysis

Zhao

Evans

2016

Phys. Rev. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A discrete version of deposition-diffusion equations appropriate for description of step flow on a vicinal surface is analyzed for a two-dimensional grid of adsorption sites representing the stepped surface and explicitly incorporating kinks along the step edges. Model energetics and kinetics appropriately account for binding of adatoms at steps and kinks, distinct terrace and edge diffusion rates, and possibly asymmetric barriers for attachment to steps. Analysis of adatom attachment fluxes as well as limiting values of adatom densities at step edges for non-uniform deposition scenarios allows determination of both permeability and kinetic coefficients. Behavior of these quantities is assessed as a function of key system parameters including kink density, step attachment barriers, and the step edge diffusion rate.

show abstract

Section: E Discrete 2d Dde Model: Extraction Of K ± and Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: E Discrete 2d Dde Model: Extraction Of K ± and Pmentioning

confidence: 99%