2016
DOI: 10.1063/1.4952950
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sub-monolayer growth of Ag on flat and nanorippled SiO2 surfaces

Abstract: In-situ Rutherford Backscattering Spectrometry (RBS) and Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulations have been used to investigate the growth dynamics of silver on a flat and the rippled silica surface. The calculated sticking coefficient of silver over a range of incidence angles shows a similar behaviour to the experimental results for an average surface binding energy of a silver adatom of 0.2 eV. This value was used to parameterise the MD model of the cumulative deposition of silver in order to understand the grow… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

2
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In QCM based method we have identified around 16 possible chances of errors; some of them are already discussed under various sections above. These errors differ from system to system, type of material grade used, sample preparation steps followed, initial roughness, QCM sensitivity, type of QCM used, cooling arrangements, type of ion beam used, space charge accumulation at sample surface, secondary ionization state of ions, contamination effects from vacuum system, sticking coefficient dependency on angle, 36 Beam control at lower energy, Condensation of atoms on QCM sensor, Scattering of sputter material from the background gas, QCM single point source collection assumption, Beam energy accuracy etc. With these limitations the error in measurements can go upto 30%, 1,2 which can leads to discrepancy in the results.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In QCM based method we have identified around 16 possible chances of errors; some of them are already discussed under various sections above. These errors differ from system to system, type of material grade used, sample preparation steps followed, initial roughness, QCM sensitivity, type of QCM used, cooling arrangements, type of ion beam used, space charge accumulation at sample surface, secondary ionization state of ions, contamination effects from vacuum system, sticking coefficient dependency on angle, 36 Beam control at lower energy, Condensation of atoms on QCM sensor, Scattering of sputter material from the background gas, QCM single point source collection assumption, Beam energy accuracy etc. With these limitations the error in measurements can go upto 30%, 1,2 which can leads to discrepancy in the results.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used a Morse potential to simulate the silver silica interaction. The potential was chosen to be consistent with reflection coefficients calculations and with results from Rutherford backscattering experiments 19 . The equation for Morse potential is given as;…”
Section: Molecular Dynamics Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only few studies have focussed to understand the atomic interaction of silver with silica [16][17][18] . In a previous paper 19 we parametrised an interatomic potential function for the Ag-SiO 2 interaction, based on matching sticking probabilities to Rutherford backscattering data. Although a few research groups have studied the temperature dependent interaction of silver thin films and silver cluster with silica 20,21 , there has been no investigation to understand the thermal dynamics of silver clusters deposited on nanopatterned templates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%