Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:17:24.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Continuum Limit of a Step Flow Model of Epitaxial Growth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

R.V. Kohn
Affiliation:
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University, 251 Mercer Street, New York, NY 10012, U.S.A.
T.S. Lo
Affiliation:
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University, 251 Mercer Street, New York, NY 10012, U.S.A.
N.K. Yip
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Purdue University, West Lafay ette, IN 47907, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

We examine a class of step ow models of epitaxial growth obtained from a Burton-Cabrera-Frank (BCF) type approach in one space dimension. Our goal is to derive a consistent contin uummodel for the evolutionof the film surface. Away from peaks and valleys, the surface height solves a Hamilton-Jacobi equation (HJE). The peaks are free boundaries for this HJE. Their evolution must be specified by boundary conditions reecting the micro- scopic physics of nucleation. We inv estigate this boundary condition by numerical simulation of the step ow dynamics using a simple nucleation law. Our results rev ealthe presence of special structures in the profile near a peak; we discuss the relationship between these structures and the contin uumequation. We further address the importance of evaporation for matching the local behavior near the peak to the solution of the contin uum equation.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Pimpinelli, A. and Villain, J., Physics of Crystal Growth. (Cambridge University Press, 1998)Google Scholar
2. Villain, J., J. de Physique I 1, 19 (1991); O. Pierre-Louis, C. Misbah, Y. Saito, J. Krug and P. Politi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4221 (1998).Google Scholar
3. Politi, P. and Villain, J., Phys. Rev. B 54, 5114 (1996).Google Scholar
4. Vvedensky, D.D., Zangwill, A., Luse, C.N. and Wilby, M.R., Phys. Rev. E 48, 852 (1993).Google Scholar
5. Burton, W.K., Cabrera, N. and Frank, F., Phil. Trans.Roy. Soc. 243, 299 (1951).Google Scholar
6. W. E, and Yip, N.K., J. Stat. Phys. 104, 221 (2001).Google Scholar
7. Evans, L.C., Partial Differential Equation, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 19. (American Mathematical Society, 1998)Google Scholar
8. Schulzeand, T. Kohn, R.V., Physica D 132, 520 (1999).Google Scholar
9. Elkinani, I. and Villain, J., J. de Physique I 4, 949 (1994).Google Scholar
10. Krug, J., Politi, P. and Michely, T., Phys. Rev. B 61, 14037 (2000); J. Krug, Eur. Phys. J. B 18, 713 (2000).Google Scholar
11. Krug, J., J. Stat. Phys. 87, 505 (1997).Google Scholar
12. Ŝmilauer, P., Rost, M. and Krug, J., Phys. Rev. E 59, R6263 (1999).Google Scholar