author hackbard Sun, 8 Jan 2012 14:45:55 +0000 (15:45 +0100) committer hackbard Sun, 8 Jan 2012 14:45:55 +0000 (15:45 +0100)

index e8f2788..e800d60 100644 (file)
@@ -1034,17 +1034,23 @@ Note: Change in orientation
{\bf\boldmath Combinations of \hkl<1 0 0>-type interstitials}\\[0.2cm]
\begin{minipage}[t]{3.2cm}
\underline{\hkl[1 0 0] at position 1}\\[0.1cm]
+{\color{cyan}
+\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=2.8cm]{00-1dc/2-25.eps}
+}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{3.0cm}
\underline{\hkl[0 -1 0] at position 1}\\[0.1cm]
-\includegraphics[width=2.8cm]{00-1dc/2-39.eps}
+{\color{orange}
+\framebox{
+\includegraphics[width=2.5cm]{00-1dc/2-39.eps}
+}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{6.1cm}
\vspace{0.7cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item \ci{} agglomeration energetically favorable
- \item Most favorable: C clustering\\
+ \item Most favorable: strong C-C bond\\
{\color{red}However \ldots}\\
\ldots high migration barrier ($>4\,\text{eV}$)\\
\ldots entropy:
@@ -1105,11 +1111,17 @@ Note: Change in orientation
{\bf\boldmath Combinations of \hkl<1 0 0>-type interstitials}\\[0.2cm]
\begin{minipage}[t]{3.2cm}
\underline{\hkl[1 0 0] at position 1}\\[0.1cm]
+{\color{cyan}
+\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=2.8cm]{00-1dc/2-25.eps}
+}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{3.0cm}
\underline{\hkl[0 -1 0] at position 1}\\[0.1cm]
-\includegraphics[width=2.8cm]{00-1dc/2-39.eps}
+{\color{orange}
+\framebox{
+\includegraphics[width=2.5cm]{00-1dc/2-39.eps}
+}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{6.1cm}
\vspace{0.7cm}
index e416b25..d030621 100644 (file)
@@ -244,11 +244,11 @@ this suggests that agglomeration of Ci indeed is expected, but no C clustering.

slide 13

-this is reinforced by the plot of the binding energy of Ci dbs
+this is reinforced by the plot of the binding energy of dumbbells
separated along the 110 direction.
a capture radius clearly exceeding 1 nm is observed.
however, the interpolated graph suggests the disappearance of attractive forces
-between the two lowest separation distances of the defects.
+between the two lowest separation distances.

this supports the assumption of C agglomeration and the absence of C clustering.