Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T15:43:17.272Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why is KPZ type surface roughening so hard to observe?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Jason T. Drotar ,
Y.-P. Zhao ,
T.-M. Lu  and
G.-C. Wang
Jason T. Drotar
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Applied Physics, and Astronomy Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY 12180-3590
Y.-P. Zhao
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Applied Physics, and Astronomy Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY 12180-3590
T.-M. Lu
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Applied Physics, and Astronomy Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY 12180-3590
G.-C. Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Applied Physics, and Astronomy Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY 12180-3590
Get access

Abstract

The Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (KPZ) surface roughening model was proposed nearly fifteen years ago. Although there have been many theoretical studies, there are very few experimental examples of thin film evolution obeying the KPZ equation. We discuss the physical basis of the KPZ equation and suggest possible reasons for the departure from KPZ behavior that is usually observed in surface growth/etching processes. Particularly, we construct a non-local, KPZ-like growth model that takes into account the effect of surface re-emission and show that, for certain limits, our model reduces to the KPZ model. We also discuss various experimental results in the context of known roughening models, including our model.

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 , P7.9
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 Kardar, Mehran, Parisi, Giorgio, and Zhang, Yi-Cheng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 889 (1986).Google Scholar
2 Edwards, S. F. and Wilkinson, D. R., Proc. of the Royal Soc. of London A 381, 17 (1982).Google Scholar
3 Barabàsi, A.-L. and Stanley, H.E., Fractal Concepts in Surface Growth (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1995).Google Scholar
4 Yoshinobu, T., Iwamoto, A., Sudoh, K., and Iwasaki, H., in Fractal Aspects of Materials, edited by Family, Fereydoon, Meakin, Paul, Sapoval, Bernard, and Wool, Richard, MRS Symposium Proceedings No. 367 (Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, 1995), p. 329.Google Scholar
5 Ojeda, Fernando, Cuerno, Rodolfo, Salvarezza, Roberto, and Vàzquez, Lui, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3125 (2000).Google Scholar
6 Zhao, Y.-P., Drotar, Jason T., Wang, G.-C., and Lu, T.-M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 4882 (1999).Google Scholar
7 Brault, Pascal, Dumas, Philippe, and Salvan, Franck, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 10, L27 (1998).Google Scholar
8 Lee, N.-E., David Cahill, G., and Greene, J. E., Phys. Rev. B 53, 7876 (1996).Google Scholar
9 Wang, Jun, Li, Gang, Yang, Ping, Cui, Mingqi, Jiang, Xiaoming, Dong, Bing, and Liu, Hong, Europhys. Lett. 42, 283 (1998).Google Scholar
10 Karunasiri, R. P. U., Bruinsma, R., and Rudnick, K., Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 788 (1989); Jian Hua Yao and Hong Guo, Phys. Rev. E 47, 1007 (1993); Christopher Roland and Hong Guo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2104 (1991); G. S. Bales and A. Zangwill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 692 (1989).Google Scholar
11 Drotar, J. T., Zhao, Y.-P., Lu, T.-M., and Wang, G.-C., Phys. Rev. B 62, 2118 (2000).Google Scholar
12 Drotar, J. T., Zhao, Y.-P., Lu, T.-M., and Wang, G.-C., Phys. Rev. B 61, 3012 (2000).Google Scholar
13 Singh, Vivek K., Shaqfeh, Eric S. G., and McVittie, James P., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 10, 1091 (1992).Google Scholar
14 Zhao, Y.-P., Drotar, J. T., Wang, G.-C., and Lu, T.-M., submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.; J. T. Drotar, Y.-P. Zhao, T.-M. Lu, and G.-C. Wang, unpublished.Google Scholar