Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T19:26:17.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Morphology of Monolayer Films Observed by Photoelectron and Low-Energy-Electron Microscopy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

M. Mundschau
Affiliation:
Technical University of Clausthal, Clausthal, Germany
E. Bauer
Affiliation:
Technical University of Clausthal, Clausthal, Germany
W. Świech
Affiliation:
Technical University of Clausthal, Clausthal, Germany
Get access

Abstract

Many of the fundamentals of epitaxial growth, long predicted by theories of crystal growth, have been seen during the molecular beam epitaxial growth of monolayer films. In general, high temperatures and low deposition flux favor nucleation at atomic steps. The opposite extreme of low temperature and high flux favors island nucleation in terraces, and steps play little role. For intermediate conditions a wide variety of growth morphology is seen. High temperatures and high flux have been seen to produce two-dimensional dendritic growth. Atomic steps on substrates have been observed to migrate during sublimation. Pinning of steps during migration gives rise to complex atomic step and terrace structures and a distribution of terrace widths. For terraces wider than the diffusion length of adsorbed atoms, nucleation of islands is favored in the terraces, whereas narrow terraces favor nucleation at the atomic steps. For a constant substrate temperature and deposition flux, morphology can vary profoundly depending upon local terrace width. Complex structures in monolayer films are produced during sublimation. These include lockeime or hole nuclei which are one atomic step deep. Steps are seen to oscillate during step flow apparently due to considerable mass transport between steps and terraces.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

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. Burton, W.K., Cabrera, N. and Frank, F.C., Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A243, 299 (1951).Google Scholar
2. Bauer, E., Mundschau, M., Ś;wiech, W. and Telieps, W. in Atomic Scale Structures of Interfaces, edited by Bringans, R.D., Feenstra, R.M. and Gibson, J.M. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 159, Boston, MA, 1989), pp. 225233.Google Scholar
3. Mundschau, M., Bauer, E., Telieps, W. and Swiech, W., Surface Sci. 223, 413 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Mundschau, M., Bauer, E. and Swiech, W., J. Appl. Phys. 65, 581 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Mundschau, M., Bauer, E., Telieps, W. and Świech, W., Phil. Mag. A 61, 257 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Mundschau, M., Bauer, E. and Świech, W., Phil. Mag A 59, 217 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Adam, N.A., The Physics and Chemistry of Surfaces, 3rd ed. (Oxford University Press, London, 1941) Chapter 1.Google Scholar
8. Mundschau, M., Bauer, E. and Świech, W., Surface Sci. 203, 412 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Mundschau, M., Bauer, E. and Świech, W., Metal. Trans. A 22, 1311 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Mundschau, M., Bauer, E., Telieps, W. and Świtch, W., J. Appl. Phys. 65, 4747 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar