Diffusion and Interface Segregation of Phosphorus and Boron in Bulk Germanium, Germanium Nanomembranes, and Nanowires

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 791-797
Author(s):  
Tong Liu ◽  
Coumba Ndoye ◽  
Marius Orlowski
Keyword(s):  
Interface Segregation

New, simple rules of interface segregation

1985 ◽  
Vol 162 (1-3) ◽  
pp. A601
Author(s):  
L.Z. Mezey ◽  
J. Giber
Keyword(s):  
Simple Rules ◽  
Interface Segregation

TiO2Surface Engineering to Improve Nanostability: The Role of Interface Segregation

2019 ◽  
Vol 123 (8) ◽  
pp. 4949-4960 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre L. da Silva ◽  
Dereck N. F. Muche ◽  
Lorena B. Caliman ◽  
Jefferson Bettini ◽  
Ricardo H. R. Castro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interface Segregation

surface Enrichment in Polymer Blends: Simple Theory and an Experimental Test

1989 ◽  
Vol 154 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.A.L. Jones ◽  
E.J. Kramer ◽  
M.H. Rafailovich ◽  
J. Sokolov ◽  
S.A. Schwarz
Keyword(s):  
Friction And Wear ◽  
Surface Segregation ◽  
Phase Region ◽  
Polymer Mixture ◽  
Recent Theory ◽  
Polymer Mixtures ◽  
Surgical Implants ◽  
Polymeric Solid ◽  
Interface Segregation ◽  
Strength Of Adhesive Joints

AbstractIf a polymer mixture which is in the bulk one-phase region is next to an interface - this may be with another polymer, with a non-polymeric solid, or with the air - the composition of the mixture at the interface will be different from the bulk [1–4]. There are two questions we would like to understand: what determines the composition of the mixture at the interface, and how does that composition increment decay back to the bulk value. This surface or interface segregation has important practical consequences; in the surface case such segregation will profoundly affect wettability, with consequences for the strength of adhesive joints and the biocompatibility of polymeric surgical implants, as well as influencing friction and wear; at interfaces with non-polymers segregation is important for the adhesion of mixed polymer phases to non-polymer phases such as reinforcing fibres or fillers. In this paper we describe some experiments on surface segregation in a very well characterised model system and we describe a recent theory that can be quantitatively tested by our data. We will consider the consequences of this new understanding of surface segregation in polymer mixtures, and we will argue that many of these conclusions may be carried over to the more general case of interface segregation, which opens up a number of interesting technological possibilities.

Interface segregation in copolymer blends measured by neutron reflection and secondary ion mass spectrometry

1991 ◽  
Vol 173 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 207-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Mansfield ◽  
R.S. Stein ◽  
R.J. Composto ◽  
M.H. Rafailovich ◽  
J. Sokolov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Neutron Reflection ◽  
Copolymer Blends ◽  
Ion Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Interface Segregation ◽  
Secondary Ion

Interface analysis in the VG microscopes’ HB603 300 keV STEM

1995 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. 286-287
Author(s):  
John Bruley ◽  
David W. Ackland ◽  
Jianxin Fang ◽  
David B. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Geometrical Optics ◽  
Planar Interface ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Detection Sensitivity ◽  
Optimum Operating ◽  
Interface Analysis ◽  
Probe Size ◽  
Working Performance ◽  
Interface Segregation

The optimum operating conditions for microanalysis (either EDX or EELS) would be those which maximize the signal-to-noise ratio, SNR, and signal-to-background ratio, SBR, and at the same time minimize the probe size so as to locate the signal to as small a volume as possible. In practice however these three quantities can not be optimized simultaneously. For many materials problems, the analyst seeks first to determine if a solute has segregated to an interface. We therefore consider the conditions required to operate the analytical microscope to maximize the detection sensitivity of interfacial segregants.The choice of lens operating conditions for carrying out interface analysis on a STEM is not necessarily intuitive. Apart from the geometrical optics, instrumental artifacts may adversely influence the observed SNR and SBR. We have carried out a series of EDX experiments to compare the working performance of interface analysis with that expected using a simple planar interface segregation model and geometrical optics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document