The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2002 · 36 citations · 17 references
Crystal StructureEngineeringCrystal Growth TechnologyLozenge-shaped Growth MorphologyDriving ForceNet AnalysisMolecular DynamicsMorphology PredictionSolidificationCrystal FormationMaterials ScienceCrystalline DefectsCrystal MaterialSolid MechanicsCrystallographyCrystal Structure DesignMicrostructureGibbsite CrystalsApplied PhysicsCrystals
The morphology of gibbsite, γ-Al(OH)3, crystals is predicted on the basis of a complete connected net analysis. It turns out that the morphology cannot be explained on the basis of the attachment energy. Instead, it is shown by a Monte Carlo algorithm based on a 2D nucleation model, that the edge (free) energy of the flat faces is the relevant parameter that determines the growth morphology. The algorithm reveals that the morphological importance of the faces follows the sequence: {112}, {112̄} ≈ {101}, {101̄} < {200} < {110} ≪ {002}. At zero driving force, gibbsite has a hexagonal morphology with {002} basal faces, {200} and {110} side and {101}, {101̄}, {112} and {112̄} chamfered faces. At higher driving forces, the chamfered faces disappear first, followed by the {200} faces. This corresponds well to our experimental results and is explained in terms of the energies involved in the formation of 2D nuclei at the various surfaces. Thus, the various morphologies observed for gibbsite crystals depending on the driving force for crystallization can be explained.
17
On the relations between structure and morphology of crystals. II
P. Hartman, W. G. Perdok · Acta Crystallographica · 1955 · 504 citations · Full text
David H. Gay, Andrew L. Rohl · Journal of the Chemical Society Faraday Transactions · 1995 · 249 citations