Upload
denna
View
139
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
From Pattern Formation to Phase Field Crystal Model. 吳國安 ( Kuo -An Wu). 清華大學物理系 Department of Physics National Tsing Hua University. 3/23/2011. Pattern Formation in Crystal Growth. by Wilson Bentley (The snowflake man), 1885. Pattern Formation in Crystal Growth. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
From Pattern Formation to Phase Field Crystal Model
吳國安 (Kuo-An Wu)
清華大學物理系Department of Physics
National Tsing Hua University
3/23/2011
Pattern Formation in Crystal Growth
by Wilson Bentley (The snowflake man), 1885
Pattern Formation in Crystal Growth
Al-Cu dendrite, Voorhees Lab Northwestern University
At the nanoscale (atomistic scale)
Liquid-Solid interfacesAnisotropy ↔ Morphology
Atomistic details ↔ Anisotropy?
Solid-Solid interfacesGrain boundary
Atomistic details ↔ growth?
Atomistic details ↔ Continuum theory at the nanoscale
Hoyt, McMaster
Schuh, MIT
Pattern Formation in Macromolecules
Polyelectrolyte Gels
Hex (-)
Hexagonal phase in solvent rich region
Hex (+)
Hexagonal phase in polymer rich region
Competition between Enthalpy, Entropy, Elastic Network Energy,Electrostatic energy, … etc
Pattern Formation in Biology
Lincoln Park ZooChicago
Rural Area, Wisconsin
Pattern Formation in Biology
Bleb Formation in Breast Cancer Cell NucleusGoldman Lab, Northwestern University
Confocal Immunofluorescence of a normal cell nucleusGoldman Lab, Northwestern University
Lamin ( 核纖層蛋白 ) A/CLamin B1, B2
Nuclear Lamina ( 核纖層 ) ~ 30-100nm
In animal cells, only composed of 2 types lamins
Crystal Growth at the Nanoscale
Solid-Solid interfaceGrain boundariesSchuh/MIT
Solid-Liquid interfaceCrystal growth from its melt with interfacial anisotropy
Solid-Fluid interface under stressQuantum dots InAs/GaAsNg et al., Univ. of Manchester, UK
2
t
n n nsolid liquid
T D T
LV cD T T
Gibbs-Thomson condition
2
ˆnM
I M
iji j
VTT T TrSL n
dSd d
1/TrS(Max ΔT)
Phase-field simulationsof solidification
( ) ( )IMax T T Min TrS
Morphology vs. Anisotropy
Anisotropy of
What causes the anisotropy?
Basal Plane
Crystal growth – Solid-Liquid interface
4 4 2 2 21 2
3 17ˆ 1 3 665 7o i i x y z
i i
n n n n n n
Anisotropy vs. Crystal structures
fcc
bcc
WHY?
0
110
111
BCC
FCC
iK r
KK e
K
K
u
K
K
sKu u
0Ku
Ginzburg-Landau Theory( )kF u
DF
u110
2 3 42 110 3 110 4 110F a u a u a u
Liquid Solid
2 3 0,, , ,
0,
20
4 0,, , ,
2
i j k
i j k l
i jij ijk i j k K K Ki j i j k
B
ijkl i j k l iK K K Ki j k l i
i j K
i
Ka c a c u u un k TF dr
a c u u u u b
u
cu zz
u
D
GL Theory for bcc-liquid interface
2110
110
2
110
12
2
1 ˆ ˆ4
, 0
i n
SS L
aS K
b c K
c K z
FF Fu
S(K)
K (Å-1)K0
20 0 0( ) ( ) / ( )c K S K S K
a3 and a
4 are determined
by equilibrium conditions
Liquid structure factor
Density Functional Theory of Freezing
0 1 2 1 2 1 20
1ln ,2
rF dr r dr r drdr c r r r r
D D D
0 K
iK r
K
eu
Free energy functional for a planarsolid-liquid interface with normal z
(110)z
110
110
101
0
0
0
FuFuFu
D
D D
2
110 110
2
110 110
2101 10 1 101 101
011 011 0 11 011
ˆ ˆ, 0
ˆ ˆ, 1
, , , 1ˆ ˆ4, , ,
K K K z
K K K z
K K K KK z
K K K K
110K
110K
101K
su
0 z
For the crystal face{110} is separated into three subsets
z1
0 14
Bcc-liquid interface profile
Anisotropic Density Profiles
(1,0)z
(1,1)z
1
2
10 , 10
01 , 01
K
K
1 10 , 10 , 01 , 0 1K
Symmetry breaks at interfaces → Anisotropy
(3, 1)z
1
2
10 , 10
01 , 01
K
K
2D Square Lattices
n x 10-23 (cm-3)
0 0
1( ) ( )yx LL
x y
n z dxdy rL L
0
iK rK
K
u e
Comparison with MD results
BCC Iron
100 1104
100 110
Fe 100 110 111 4 (%)
MD (MH(SA)2) 177.0(11) 173.5(11) 173.4(11) 1.0(0.6)GL theory 144.26 145.59 137.57 1.02
Predict the correct ordering of and weak anisotropy 1% for bcc crystals
Anisotropy
(erg/cm2)
Comparison with MD results
Atomistic details (Crystal structures) matter!
Methodology for atomistic simulations
Molecular Dynamics (MD) Mean field theoryGinzburg-Landau theory
Realistic physics Resolve vibration modes (ps)
0
1
Rely on MD inputs Average out atomistic details Diffusive dynamics (ms) Larger length scale (m) Elasticity, defect structure, … etc?
Methodology for atomistic simulations
Molecular Dynamics (MD) Mean field theoryPhase field crystal (PFC)
Average out vibration modes (ms) Atomistic details – elasticity, crystalline planes,
dislocations, … etc.
Realistic physics Resolve vibration modes (ps)
(001) plane of bcc crystals
(100) (110)
Formulation - Phase Field Crystal
Capillary Anisotropy?Elasticity?
Swift & Hohenberg, PRA (1977)2D Patterns – Rolls, Hexagons
Elder et al., PRL (2002)Propose a conserved SH equation
The Free Energy Functional
Equation of Motion
PFC Model – Phase Diagram
{110}
iK rK
K
A e
Phase diagram
Conserved Dynamics
Maxwell construction
Seek the perturbative solution
The solid-liquid coexistence region
A weak first-order freezing transition(The multi-scale analysis of bcc-liquid interfaces will be carried out around c)
Multi-scale Analysis
Assumption – interface width is much larger than lattice parameter
0iA Z
iiK re
Small limit – diffuse interfaceMulti-scale analysis
Equal chemical potential in both phases
One of twelve stationary amplitude equations
Multi-scale Analysis – Amplitude equation
u110
Order Parameter Profile Comparison
(110)z For the crystal face
2
0.0923 for Fe with
MH(SA) potential (MD)
Determination of the PFC model Parameter from densityfunctional theory of freezing
100 1104
100 110
Fe 100 110 111 4 (%)
MD (MH(SA)2) 177.0(11) 173.5(11) 173.4(11) 1.0(0.6)GL theory 144.26 141.35 137.57 1.02
PFC 144.14 140.67 135.76 1.22
Predict the correct ordering of 100 > 110 > 111
and weak anisotropy 1% for bcc crystals
Anisotropy
(erg/cm2)
Comparison with MD results
What about Other Crystal Structures?
{110}
iK rK
K
A e
Phase diagram
2 3 42 110 3 110 4 110F a u a u a u
(110)
(011)
(101)
F
u110
x
y
z
BCC-Liquid
2 42 200
23 111 200
2 42 111 4 1 01 201 4
b u u
a u bF b u ua u
111 11 1
200
F
FCC-Liquid
3
1
2 42 111 4 111
1, 1, 1
ixi
K
F a u a u
cannot form The principal reciprocal lattice vectror
of fcc
0
cannot form solid- liquid interf
triad
aces
GL theory of fcc-liquid interfaces
The Two-mode fcc model
2 (2,0,0)a
K
)(KS
2 (1,1,1)a
The PFC model
220
22
1
1 1,1,1 13
1 42,0,033
K
K
FCC Model
Phase Diagram
Twin Boundary
FCC Polycrystal
Design Desired Lattices
Example: Square Lattices
Single-mode model
Multi-mode model
Dictate interaction angle(lattice symmtry)
Elasticity
Grain Boundary
Grain boundary is composed of dislocations
Geometric arrangement of crystals determines dislocation distribution
Distinct evolution for low and high angle grain boundary
Symmetric tilt planar grain boundary in goldby STEM
: magnitude of Burgers vector: misorientation
bD
b
D
D
D
GB sliding and coupling
/ 2
GB Coupling – Low Angle GB GB Sliding – High Angle GB
tD
nD
/ 2
Sutton & Balluffi, Interfaces in Crystalline Materials, 1995
Well described bycontinuum theory
Large Misorientations
Curvature driven motionG.B. sliding (fixed misorientation)
remains constant
20
Well described by classical continuum theory
Small Orientations
5
Atoms at the center of the circular grain
2 GBF R D Theory that only considers
Misorientation decreases?
Misorientation increases!
Small Misorientations
G.B. coupling
Misorientation-dependent mobility:
For symmetric tilt boundaries
(Taylor & Cahn)
Misorientation increasesGB energy increases
22 1
~ /
(1 )
m
m
v C r
Area r C at
Intermediate Misorientations – cont.
2.3m
10
Intermediate Misorientations
10
Faceted–Defaceted Transition
Frank-Bilby formula Tangential motion of dislocations Annihilation of dislocations
Intermediate Misorientations – cont.
dD
Instability of tangential motion occurs when
2
1 21
1 2 1 2ˆ
b brdN n b b b
0 /3F
2
sin / 63 32 cos / 6 2
R G
F
F F
G F
Spacing d1 is a function of GB normal n
Three-Grain System
5.2o
5.2o
0o
Grain Rotation?
GB wiggles
Grain Rotation
5.2o
0o
5.2o
0o
5.2o
Grain Translation
5.2º
-5.2º
0ºGB
Wriggles
Dihedral anglefollows Frank’s formulanot the Herring relation
Self-Assembled Quantum Dots
Lee et al., Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Quantum-dot LEDs Other Applications- Tunable QD Laser- Quantum Computing- Telecommunication- and more
Quantum dots InAs/GaAsNg et al., Univ. of Manchester, UK
ˆ exp x yh ik x ik y
2 2 2ˆ , ,
2 2 10 100 nmcc
U h k E E kA
k E
D
Linear perturbationcalculation
k
UAD
ck
Film
Substrate
h
z
x
Stress Induced Instability – Asaro-Tiller-Grinfeld Instability
f s
s
a aa
0
Schematic plot from Voorhees and JohnsonSolid State Physics, 59
Cullis et al. (1992): 40 nm thick Si0.79Ge0.21 on (001) Si substrate - Grown at 1023 K (Defect-free growth)
Misfit Parameter
as
af
Later Stage Evolution - Cusp Formation - Dislocations
Si0.5Ge0.5/Si(001)Jesson et al., Z-Contrast, Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., Phys. Rev. Lett. 1993
High stress concentration at the tip
Simulation Parameters
0.10
32
448 12802048
y y
x x
x
y
L NL NNN
yL81
yL87
0
22 4
2
112 4
F dr
Ft
The PFC model
Simulation parameters
Various sizes
HexagonalPhase
ConstantPhase
ConstantPhase
(1+xx)Lx
2
1900
480 1360# of atoms 15,000 40,000
o
o
y
o
x
a A
L A
L A
Nonlinear Steady State for a Smaller k
k
ˆxxˆyy
Quantitative Comparison of Strain Fields
1%xx 422 1 ,2 4
1 FF drt
ˆ ˆ,xx yy
y
Correct elastic fields Elastic fields relax much faster than the density field
iK
K r
K
eA
: conserved quantity: non-conserved quantityKA
Critical Wavenumber vs Strain
Linear perturbation theory- Sharp Interface- Homogeneous Materials
22 xxc
Ek
: Young's modulus: Surface energyE
PFC simulationsPFC simulations
Classical Elasticity Theory
Nonlinear ElasticityxxE
Xie et al., Si0.5Ge0.5 films, PRL
2
1xx
c
W
Linear Elasticity
kc ~ xx2 for small strains
Nonlinear elasticity modifies length scale
PFC modeling of nonlinear elasticity
Solid
Liquid
( )xxE
~ 0xx
2%xx
Inhomogeneous materials nonlinear elasticity
Finite Interface Thickness Effect
Solid, E=Eo
Liquid, E=0
E(x,y)
c~1/2·
xx-2
W~-1/2
Finite interface thickness WElastic constants vary smoothlyacross the Interface region
Upper boundsint erface solidE E
Interface thickness is no longer negligible at the nanoscale
Nonlinear Evolution for k ~ km
k
3D Island – BCC Systems
And More …
VLS nanowires Nano-particles with defects
And More …
Pattern Formation - Examples
Graphene
North Pole Hexagon on Saturn Ice CrystalAgular et al, Oxford University
HoneycombRock Formation in Ireland
Collaborators
Mathis PlappLaboratoire de Physique de la Matière Condensée
Ecole Polytechnique
Alain KarmaNortheatsern University
Peter W. VoorheesNorthwestsern University