Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:04:36.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Stability of the Low Temperature Surface Reconstruction in Au(111)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Todd M. Trimble  and
Robert C. Cammarata
Todd M. Trimble
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
Robert C. Cammarata
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
Get access

Abstract

We have performed computer simulation studies on the 22×√3 surface reconstruction of Au(111). This reconstruction involves a uniaxial contraction of the top monolayer corresponding to a surface strain of about 4.3% and has been observed to be the stable structure for clean surfaces at low temperatures. A continuum model yields a stability criterion that depends on the knowledge of a small number of measurable physical quantities: surface stress f, surface free energy γ, lattice parameter a0 and shear modulus µ. The simulations using EAM potentials accurately reproduce many observed features of the reconstruction and tend to support the continuum model and the resulting stability criterion.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 648: Symposium P – Growth, Evolution & Properties of Surfaces, Thin Films, and Self Organized Structure , 2000 , P3.22
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

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. Cammarata, R.C., Surf. Sci. 279, 3341 (1992).Google Scholar
2. Herring, C., in The Structure and Properties of Solid Surfaces, edited by Gomer, R. and Smith, C.S. (University of Chicago, Chicago, 1953), p. 5.Google Scholar
3. Needs, R.J., Godfrey, M.J. and Mansfield, M., Surf. Sci. 242, 215 (1991).Google Scholar
4. Harten, U., Lahee, A.M., Toennies, J.P. and Woll, Ch., Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 2619 (1985).Google Scholar
5. Daw, M.S. and Baskes, M.I., Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1285 (1983).Google Scholar
6. Daw, M.S. and Baskes, M.I., Phys. Rev. B 29, 6443 (1984).Google Scholar
7. Johnson, R.A., Phys. Rev. B 37, 3924 (1988).Google Scholar
8. Needs, R.J. and Mansfield, M., J. Phys. Cond. Mat. 1 7555 (1989).Google Scholar
9. Barth, J.V., Brune, H., Ertl, G., and Behm, R.J., Phys. Rev. B 42, 9307 (1990).Google Scholar