Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T23:49:56.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Semiempirical Angular-Force Method for BCC Transition Metals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

A. E. Carlsson
A. E. Carlsson*
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130
Get access

Abstract

An angular-force method for bcc transition-metals is obtained by generating a functional form via a quantum-mechanical analysis, and subsequently fitting the parameters in this form to experimental and ab-initio theoretical inputs. The quantummechanical analysis uses a four-moment treatment of the electronic density of states (DOS) in a d-band tight-binding model. Calibration of the method gives excellent results for the bcc-fcc energy difference and the vacancy-formation energy in W. The method is used to treat relaxation and c(2 × 2) reconstruction on the W (100) surface. The relaxation energy is primarily due to two-body terms, while the reconstruction requires the angular terms. Agreement with ab-initio results is obtained for reasonable values of the parameters in the model. However, the energy difference between the reconstructed surface and the optimally relaxed surface is quite sensitive to the details of the implementation of the method.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 209: Symposium K – Defects in Materials , 1990, 165
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1991

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Daw, M. S. and Baskes, M. I., Phys. Rev. B 29, 6443 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Finnis, M. W. and Sinclair, J., Phil. Mag. A 50, 45 (1984);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phil. Mag. 53, 161 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Carlsson, A. E., in Solid State Physics; Advances in Research and Applications, Volume 43, edited by Ehrenreich, H. and Turnbull, D. (Academic, New York, 1990), p. 1.Google Scholar
4. Moriarty, J., Phys. Rev. B 38, 3199 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Phillips, R. B. and Carlsson, A. E., Phys. Rev. B 42, 3345 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Moriarty, J. A. and Phillips, R. B., Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 35, 283, Abstract C8–4, (1990).Google Scholar
7. Ducastelle, F. and Cyrot-Lackmann, F., J. Phys. Chem. Solids 32, 285 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Hirai, K. and Kanamori, J., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 50, 2265 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Carlsson, A. E., Fedders, P. A., and Myles, C. W., Phys. Rev. B 41, 1247 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. These are usefully summarized in Harrison, W. A., Electronic Structure and the Properties of Solids, (Freeman, New York, 1980).Google Scholar
11. Skriver, H. L., The LMTO Method, (Springer, New York, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Felter, T., Barker, R. A., and Estrup, P. J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1138 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar