Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:54:36.335Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Monte Carlo Study of Reconstruction of the Au (110) Surface Using Equivalent Crystal Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Brian S. Good  and
Amitava Banerjea
Brian S. Good
Affiliation:
NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH, 44135
Amitava Banerjea
Affiliation:
NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH, 44135 NRC Senior Research Associate
Get access

Abstract

The (110) surface of gold is known experimentally to undergo a 1 × 2 reconstruction which is believed to be of the “missing row” type. There have been a number of theoretical studies of the energetics and geometry of this reconstruction. In this work, we present new results obtained using two versions of the Equivalent Crystal Theory (ECT). The ECT has proven to be quite accurate in providing predictions of surface energies and planar relaxations. The extended version of the ECT has been modified to better describe such quantities as elastic constants and shear energies. We have computed the energetics and geometry of the missing-row reconstructed surface, in both unrelaxed and relaxed form, using a Monte Carlo energy minimization technique, allowing relaxation of the positions of atoms up to three layers deep. We compare these results with previous theoretical work and with available experimental data.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 278: Symposium W – Computational Methods in Materials Science , 1992 , 211
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

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

[1] Bonzel, H. P. and Ferrer, S., Surf. Sci. 118, L263 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Good, B. S. and Banerjea, A., Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 35, 253 (1990).Google Scholar
[3] Tomanek, D. and Benneman, K. H., Surf. Sci. 163, 503 (1985).Google Scholar
[4] Smith, John R. and Banerjea, Amitava, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 2451 (1987).Google Scholar
[5] Smith, J. R., Perry, T., Banerjea, A., Ferrante, J. and Bozzolo, G. H., Phys. Rev. B 44, 6444 (1991)Google Scholar
[6] Rose, J. H., Ferrante, J. and Smith, J. R., Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 675 (1981), and J. H. Rose, J. R. Smith and J. Ferrante, Phys. Rev. B28, 1835 (1983).Google Scholar
[7] Smith, J. R., and Banerjea, A., Phys. Rev. B37, 10411 (1988).Google Scholar
[8] Tyson, W. R. and Miller, W. A., Surf. Sci. 62, 267 (1977).Google Scholar
[9] Ho, K.-M. and Bohnen, K. P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 1833 (1987).Google Scholar
[10] Dregia, S. A., Bauer, C. L. and Wynblatt, P., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A5, 766 (1987).Google Scholar
[11] Roelofs, L. D., Foiles, S. M., Daw, M. S. and Baskes, M. I., Surf. Sci. 234, 63 (1990).Google Scholar
[12] Foiles, S. M., Surf. Sci. 191, L779 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Moritz, W. add Wolf, D., Surf. Sci. 163, L655 (1985).Google Scholar