/ Home
/ SUBMISSION

/ The BJNANO
/ Diamond Open Access
/ Journal Statistics
/ Editorial Board
/ Community
/ Call for papers

/ Latest Articles
/ Most accessed
/ Thematic issues
/ Volumes
/ Authors

/ Alerts

/ TWITTER
/ LINKEDIN
/ Mastodon
/ RSS FEED

Empty search

Article Type

Publication Date Range

Search Tips

This search combines search strings from the content search (i.e. "Full Text", "Author", "Title", "Abstract", or "Keywords") with "Article Type" and "Publication Date Range" using the AND operator.

Search Examples

aromatic	the word “aromatic”
aromatic aldehyde	the word “aromatic” OR “aldehyde”
+aromatic +aldehyde	both words “aromatic” AND “aldehyde”
+aromatic -aldehyde	the word “aromatic” but NOT “aldehyde”
“aromatic aldehyde”	the exact phrase “aromatic aldehyde”
benz*	words which begin with “benz”, such as “benzene” or “benzyl”
benz*yl	words that begin with “benz” and end with “yl”, such as “benzyl” or “benzoyl”
benzyl~	words that are close to the word “benzyl”, such as “benzoyl” (i.e., fuzzy search)

BROWSE
Latest Articles
Most accessed
thematic issues
volumes
authors

BROWSE

Latest Articles Most Accessed Thematic Issues Volumes Authors

Author

2 article(s) from Bahm, Alan

Ultralow-energy amorphization of contaminated silicon samples investigated by molecular dynamics

Grégoire R. N. Defoort-Levkov,
Alan Bahm and
Patrick Philipp

Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2023, 14, 834–849, doi:10.3762/bjnano.14.68

PDF

Figure 1: Representations of the contaminated sample under argon irradiation for an incidence angle of 45° an...

Jump to Figure 1

Figure 2: Evolution of the amorphization coefficient as funciton of the energy for (a) 0°, (b) 30°, (c) 45°, ...

Jump to Figure 2

Figure 3: Evolution of the thickness of (a) the amorphous region and (b) the partially amorphous region for e...

Jump to Figure 3

Figure 4: Evolution of the RDF for each slab at collisions under 30° and 75° incidence from crystalline to am...

Jump to Figure 4

Figure 5: Implantation depth of argon atoms for incidence angles of (a) 0°, (b) 30°, (c) 45°, (d) 60°, (e) 75...

Jump to Figure 5

Figure 6: Total implantation counts of (a) argon atoms, (b) oxygen atoms, and (c) hydrogen atoms in the sampl...

Jump to Figure 6

Figure 7: Mean implantation depth of (a) argon atoms, (b) oxygen atoms, and (c) hydrogen atoms in the sample ...

Jump to Figure 7

Figure 8: Partial sputtering yields for (a) silicon, (b) oxygen, and (c) hydrogen with respect to the angle f...

Jump to Figure 8

Figure 9: Comparison between experimental data and simulation data found in the literature. Full symbols repr...

Jump to Figure 9

Figure 10: Sputtering yields for (a) MD simulations of pristine and contaminated silicon and (b) SDTrimSP simu...

Jump to Figure 10

Album

Supp Info

Full Research Paper

Published 01 Aug 2023

Full text

Influence of water contamination on the sputtering of silicon with low-energy argon ions investigated by molecular dynamics simulations

Grégoire R. N. Defoort-Levkov,
Alan Bahm and
Patrick Philipp

Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2022, 13, 986–1003, doi:10.3762/bjnano.13.86

PDF

Figure 1: Fit of the DFT data for the argon–silicon potential in (a) the 1–5 Å region, with the potential wel...

Jump to Figure 1

Figure 2: Visualisations of the samples during equilibration steps: (a) represents the silicon sample after S...

Jump to Figure 2

Figure 3: Representations of (a) clean and (b) contaminated samples. The silicon atoms are shown in yellow, o...

Jump to Figure 3

Figure 4: Bond length distributions for the pristine sample (blue) and the contaminated sample (pink) regardl...

Jump to Figure 4

Figure 5: Evolution of bond lengths in the contaminated sample under bombardment. (a) The first graph shows b...

Jump to Figure 5

Figure 6: Evolution of the clean (a, b, c) and contaminated (d, e, f) samples under ion irradiation, before t...

Jump to Figure 6

Figure 7: Representation of each region in the sample, the amorphous region is the one with the highest disor...

Jump to Figure 7

Figure 8: Evolution of the μ coefficient with respect to the angle for (a) pristine and (b) contaminated samp...

Jump to Figure 8

Figure 9: Radial distribution function for (a) clean and (b) contaminated samples for all previously determin...

Jump to Figure 9

Figure 10: Comparison of the radial distribution function for both samples in the amorphous layer. The same cu...

Jump to Figure 10

Figure 11: Comparison of the radial distribution function in the amorphous slab of the contaminated sample wit...

Jump to Figure 11

Figure 12: Comparison between samples after irradiation with an incident beam at 100 eV and 85° for (a) the pr...

Jump to Figure 12

Figure 13: Distribution of implanted contaminants, (a) oxygen, (b) hydrogen and (c) argon, with respect to the...

Jump to Figure 13

Figure 14: Number of argon atoms retained in the sample, regardless of the depth of implantation, with respect...

Jump to Figure 14

Figure 15: Evolution of the Si–O (a) and Si–H (b) products with respect to the fluence and the angle.

Jump to Figure 15

Figure 16: Sputtering yields of pristine and contaminated samples with respect to the incidence angle. For the...

Jump to Figure 16

Figure 17: Fraction of the contaminants sputtered after 500 impacts with respect to the angle. The values are ...

Jump to Figure 17

Figure 18: Sputtering yields for (a) silicon-related and (b) oxygen-related clusters.

Jump to Figure 18

Figure 19: Graph showing the probability to dissociate at least one water cluster per impact, with respect to ...

Jump to Figure 19

Album

Supp Info

Full Research Paper

Published 21 Sep 2022

Full text

Other Beilstein-Institut Open Science Activities

/ Help / Support & Contact / Alerts / Privacy Policy / Terms & Conditions / Impressum