Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:36:53.367Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The optical constants of natural and artificial cuprite by an ellipsometric method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

E. F. I. Roberts  and
P. Rastall
E. F. I. Roberts
Affiliation:
Department of Metallurgy and Materials, City of London Polytechnic, Whitechapel High Street, London E1 7PF
P. Rastall
Affiliation:
Department of Metallurgy and Materials, City of London Polytechnic, Whitechapel High Street, London E1 7PF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Ellipsometric measurements in the spectral range 250–850 nm have been made on polished single crystals of natural cuprite from Namibia and of artificial cuprite grown by a total-oxidation method from pure copper. Derived values of the refractive indices, absorption coefficients, normal reflectances, and the complex dielectric constants for the two materials are all closely similar, suggesting that the stoichiometry and purity are essentially the same. Values of the absorption coefficient at the red end of the spectrum are inconsistent with the observed transparency of the crystals, and are compatible with a 10 nm surface oxidation film of cupric oxide. This study is part of a wider survey of the effects of doping and stoichiometry on the optical parameters of cuprite.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 42 , Issue 324 , December 1978 , pp. 505 - 508
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1978

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.)

References

Clapham, (P. B.), Downs, (M. J.), and King, (R. J.), 1969. Applied Optics, 8, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, (J. P.) and Switendick, (A. C.), 1966. J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 27, 931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, (E. F.) and Kuang-Yin, (Chang), 1962. Soy. Phys.- Dokl. [translation], 7, 336.Google Scholar
Ladelfe, (P. C.). Czanderna, (A. W.), and Biegen, (J. R.), 1972. Thin Solid Films, 10, 403-11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez-Clemente, (M.), Bretheau, (T.), and Castaing, (J.), 1976. J. Physique, 37, 895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, (R. H.), 1973. Advances in Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering, 9, 167–226.Google Scholar
Roberts, (E. F. I.) and Meadows, (A.), 1974. J. Phys. (E), 7, 379-86.Google Scholar
Schmidt-Whitley, (R. D.), Martinez-Clemente, (M.), and Revcolevshi, (A.), 1974. J. Cryst. Growth, 23, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shestatskii, (S. N.) and Sobolev, (V.), 1969. Phys. Star. Solidi, 32, K 109.Google Scholar
Zhilich, (A. G.) and Makarov, (V. P.), 1960. Soy. Phys. Solid State [translation], 2, 1587.Google Scholar