Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Dec 21, 2016 Intrinsic roughness in suspended van der Waals heterostructures Thomsen, Joachim Dahl; Bøggild, Peter; Booth, Tim Publication date: 2016 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication Citation (APA): Thomsen, J. D., Bøggild, P., & Booth, T. (2016). Intrinsic roughness in suspended van der Waals heterostructures. Poster session presented at Carbonhagen 2016, Copenhagen, Denmark. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Intrinsic roughness in suspended van der Waals heterostructures Joachim Dahl Thomsen, Peter Bøggild, Timothy J. Booth DTU Nanotech, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark Introduction Intrinsic roughness/ripples • Ripples in graphene are ubiquitous – seen for both for graphene on hBN, SiO2 [1] and suspended graphene [2] • Ripples may be a large factor limiting electron mobility [3] [4] Fig. by Jannick C. Meyer Encapsulated graphene • Making hBN-G-hBN heterostructures is a well known strategy for obtaining high mobility grapene samples • Measurements of supported graphene on hBN have shown root mean square (RMS) roughnesses around 1.4 Å similar to the roughness of suspended graphene [1] hBN-G-hBN heterostructure • Here we show that the roughness can Graphene hBN be reduced further by suspending the Figure taken from ref. [6] heterostructure. Roughness of heterostructures Roughness and normal angle spread The roughness of two BN/G heterostructures and three suspended graphene samples were measured in a TEM. a On one heterostructure sample the roughnes of the suspended graphene part was also measured (Fig. 4) b c Graphene /hBN Graphene Fig. 4 – Optical image (a) and optical dark field image (b) showing a G/BN heterostructure (sample 2) on silicon dioxide, (c) TEM image of the same sample. Methods – In-situ TEM and Fabrication Plots of ln(A) vs. G2 for the samples are shown in Fig. 5 and the corresponding measured roughnesses are listed in the legend. Reciprocal space of rough graphene The full 3D Fourier transform of rough graphene in reciprocal space (u,v,w) consists of a set of cones (Fig. 1) hBN/G 0 If the graphene is rough the diffraction spots become diffuse when tilting the sample Graphene 0o tilt 2G (0o) Fig. 1 – the 3D Fourier transform of rippled graphene consists of cones. The green plane represents the Ewald sphere intersecting the density distribution to form diffraction patterns. Figure taken from Ref. [5] Graphene 18o tilt 2G (20 (18oo)) 2G Graphene 36o tilt 2G (36o) ln(A) (arb. u) For G/hBN samples the spots remain the same Sample -1 RMS roughness (Å) 1 - G/BN 0.23 ± 0.01 2 – G/BN 0.19 ± 0.04 2 – G only 1.22 ± 0.03 3 – G only 1.14 ± 0.02 4 – G only 1.19 ± 0.02 -2 -3 5 – CVD G 1.56 ± 0.05 Suspended graphene -4 20 22 24 26 2 28 30 32 -2 G (nm ) Graphene/hBN 0o tilt Graphene/hBN 18o tilt Graphene/hBN 36o tilt Fig. 2 – diffration patterns of graphene and graphene/hBN at 0o, 18o and 36o tilt. Fig. 5 – plots of the logarithm of the diffraction spot amplitude as a function of the square of the distance from the zero order diffraction spot to the spot center. The slope of the linear fits is proportional to the RMS roughness of the graphene. Roughness The spot intensity of rough graphene varies as 𝐴𝐴 ∝ exp − 2𝜋𝜋𝐺𝐺 2 ℎ2 , where ℎ2 is the RMS roughness [5]. Hence ℎ2 1 𝑑𝑑ln A = 2𝜋𝜋 𝑑𝑑𝐺𝐺 2 Sample fabrication The samples were made using the hot pick-up method (Fig. 3) [6] Fig. 3 – Hot pick-up procedure, (i) pick-up of hBN, (ii) drop down on graphene, (iii) release of polymer stack. Fig. taken from ref. [6] The work leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° FP7-604000 Conclusion • Roughness is possibly the main factor limiting mobility in suspended samples • Even graphene encapsulated in hBN shows a RMS roughness around 1.4 Å • By suspending the heterostructures we have measured a significant decrease in RMS roughness – around 0.2 Å. [1] – M. Yamamoto et.al, ACS Nano 6, no. 9 (2012) ,p. 8335-8341 [2] – J.C. Meyer et. Al, Nature 446, p. 60-63 (2007) [3] – M.I. Katsnelson and A.K. Geim, Phil. Trans R. Soc. 336, p. 195-204 (2008) [4] – E.V. Castro et. al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, p. 266601 (2010) [2] - N. D. Mermin, Phys. Rev. 176, p. 250 (1968) [5] – D.A. Kirilenko et. al, Phys. Rev. B 84, 235417 (2011) [6] – F. Pizzocchero et. al, Nat. Comm. 7, 11894 (2016)
© Copyright 2024