Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T02:31:36.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Role of Chemical Interactions in the Stability of Artificial Metallic Superlattices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

M. Sluiter  and
P.E.A. Turchi
M. Sluiter
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Condensed Matter Division (L-268), Livermore, CA 94550
P.E.A. Turchi
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Condensed Matter Division (L-268), Livermore, CA 94550
Get access

Abstract

Atom by atom deposition techniques, such as magnetron sputtering, make possible the synthesis of artificial superlattices with composition modulations in one dimension on an atomic scale[1]. Generaily, elastic effects (lattice mismatch) and chemical affinity (ordering or clustering tendencies are recognized as the most important driving forces for the thermodynamic stability of such materials. In this study the chemical aspect of stability will be examined using a formalism based on first-principles electronic structure calculations developed originally for bulk alloys. The formalism has been applied to a number of systems with fee and bec transition metals as constituents. In some cases the stability of artificial superlattices was found to depend in a rather surprising and unexpected way on the direction and wavelength of the composition modulation.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 238: Symposium Cb – Structure and Properties of Interfaces in Materials , 1991 , 623
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

REFERENCES

1. see e.g. Barbee, T.W. in MRS Bulletin XV (2), p. 17 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Huberman, M.L. and Grimditch, M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1403 (1989), and references therein.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Baibich, M.N., Broto, J.M., Fert, A., Nguyen Van Dau, F., Petroff, F., Etienne, P., Creuzet, G., Friedrich, A., and Chazelas, J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2472 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Schwarz, R.B. and Johnson, W.L., Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 415 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Turchi, P.E.A., Sluiter, M., Pinski, F.J., Johnson, D.D., Nicholson, D.M., Stocks, G.M., and Staunton, J.B., Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 1779 (1991), and references therein.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Sluiter, M. and Turchi, P.E.A., Phys. Rev. B, to be published (1992).Google Scholar
7. Kaburagi, M. and Kanamori, J., Prog. Theor. Phys. 54, 30 (1975);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finel, A., Thèse d'Etat es Sciences Physiques, University Paris VI, unpublished (1987).Google Scholar
8. Sluiter, M. and Turchi, P.E.A., J. Mat. Sci. Eng., in press (1992).Google Scholar
9. Jankowski, A.F. and Wall, M. A., in these proceedings.Google Scholar