2016
DOI: 10.1038/srep33931
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What determines the interfacial configuration of Nb/Al2O3 and Nb/MgO interface

Abstract: Nb films are deposited on single crystal Al2O3 (110) and MgO(111) substrates by e-beam evaporation technique. Structure of Nb films and orientation relationships (ORs) of Nb/Al2O3 and Nb/MgO interface are studied and compared by the combination of experiments and simulations. The experiments show that the Nb films obtain strong (110) texture, and the Nb film on Al2O3(110) substrate shows a higher crystalline quality than that on MgO(111) substrate. First principle calculations show that both the lattice mismat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
1
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The interfacial binding energy, defined as the reversible energy required to separate the interface into two free surfaces, is considered as a fundamental quantity to characterize the strength and stability of the substrate/epitaxy interfaces, reflecting the ability of the epitaxial crystal growth. In order to calculate the interfacial binding energy at the interfaces mentioned in Table , four LAO/LLTO coherent interface models (shown in Figure ) were selected to build the heterostructure interface as follows: for the LAO{100}–LLTO{100} heterostructure, a 1 × 1 unit cell of LAO{100} with a 2D rectangular cell of 7.56 × 7.56 Å and a 1 × 1 unit cell of LLTO{100} with a 2D rectangular cell of 7.75 × 7.75 Å were chosen. The lattice mismatch (where u and v indicate the two orthogonal directions on the plane surface) was as follows: δ u = δ v = −2.51%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The interfacial binding energy, defined as the reversible energy required to separate the interface into two free surfaces, is considered as a fundamental quantity to characterize the strength and stability of the substrate/epitaxy interfaces, reflecting the ability of the epitaxial crystal growth. In order to calculate the interfacial binding energy at the interfaces mentioned in Table , four LAO/LLTO coherent interface models (shown in Figure ) were selected to build the heterostructure interface as follows: for the LAO{100}–LLTO{100} heterostructure, a 1 × 1 unit cell of LAO{100} with a 2D rectangular cell of 7.56 × 7.56 Å and a 1 × 1 unit cell of LLTO{100} with a 2D rectangular cell of 7.75 × 7.75 Å were chosen. The lattice mismatch (where u and v indicate the two orthogonal directions on the plane surface) was as follows: δ u = δ v = −2.51%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It should be noted that enough low values of the work of separation were calculated earlier in several papers, if oxide is terminated by one oxygen layer. For example, W sep equal to 1.37 J/m 2 was obtained at the Nb(110)/Al 2 O 3 (1120) O interface [48] while the value is one order more at the Nb(110)/Al 2 O 3 (1120) 2O one [49]. In the case of the U(110)/Al 2 O 3 (1120) O interface, the value of 1.90 J/m 2 was calculated, but 11.5 J/m 2 was obtained at the U(110)/Al 2 O 3 (1120) 2O interface [50].…”
Section: Surface Energymentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Instead, if the interface becomes atomically chemically graded, structural features like lattice parameters change gradually. Misfit dislocations will be distributed across several planes at the interface rather than being accumulated at one plane 9 . Such gradual variation can result in unusual thermal conductivity across the interface.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%