1978
DOI: 10.1016/0039-6028(78)90274-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surface composition and surface cluster size distribution of Cu-Ni alloys via a monte carlo method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0
4

Year Published

1987
1987
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 88 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
4
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…This means that the Cu concentration at the surface is always higher than that of the bulk. Our results are also in agreement with the Monte Carlo calculations (Donnelly and King 1978) which have emphasised the effects of the temperature and the surface orientation on the surface composition. In our calculations, however, the anisotropy has less pronounced effects on the surface segregation than it has in the calculations of Donnelly and King (1978).…”
Section: Surface Composition Of Cuni Ulloys In Equilibriumsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…This means that the Cu concentration at the surface is always higher than that of the bulk. Our results are also in agreement with the Monte Carlo calculations (Donnelly and King 1978) which have emphasised the effects of the temperature and the surface orientation on the surface composition. In our calculations, however, the anisotropy has less pronounced effects on the surface segregation than it has in the calculations of Donnelly and King (1978).…”
Section: Surface Composition Of Cuni Ulloys In Equilibriumsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…de Monte Carlo [1][2][3]. Nous nous sommes toujours limitds a des applications haute temp6rature par rapport a d'6ventuels points critiques.…”
Section: Aspects Générauxunclassified
“…In fact, it has been assumed that the bond strengths are related to the number of nearest neighbours of an atom, and hence, the strengths differ at the surface from that in the bulk [25]. This assumed connection between the surface relaxation and the number of nearest neighbours of atom possibly informed the reason why Prasad and Singh [19] and Novakovic et al [26] independently suggested that the m and q which are the fractions of the total next neighbour contacts made by a molecule within its own layer and that in either adjoining layer usually taken as m ¼ 0.5 and q ¼ 0.25 be treated as parameters in view of the disordered structure and relaxation effects.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%