| Literature DB >> 21711904 |
Maguy Dominiczak1, Larissa Otubo, David Alamarguy, Frédéric Houzé, Sebastian Volz, Sophie Noël, Jinbo Bai.
Abstract
Using an atomic force microscope (AFM) at a controlled contact force, we report the electrical signal response of multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) disposed on a golden thin film. In this investigation, we highlight first the theoretical calculation of the contact resistance between two types of conductive tips (metal-coated and doped diamond-coated), individual MWCNTs and golden substrate. We also propose a circuit analysis model to schematize the «tip-CNT-substrate» junction by means of a series-parallel resistance network. We estimate the contact resistance R of each contribution of the junction such as Rtip-CNT, RCNT-substrate and Rtip-substrate by using the Sharvin resistance model. Our final objective is thus to deduce the CNT intrinsic radial resistance taking into account the calculated electrical resistance values with the global resistance measured experimentally. An unwished electrochemical phenomenon at the tip apex has also been evidenced by performing measurements at different bias voltages with diamond tips. For negative tip-substrate bias, a systematic degradation in color and contrast of the electrical cartography occurs, consisting of an important and non-reversible increase of the measured resistance. This effect is attributed to the oxidation of some amorphous carbon areas scattered over the diamond layer covering the tip. For a direct polarization, the CNT and substrate surface can in turn be modified by an oxidation mechanism.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21711904 PMCID: PMC3211423 DOI: 10.1186/1556-276X-6-335
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Figure 1(a1, a2) AFM topographic images (1 × 1 μm. The cantilever load-force was about 16 to 80 nN, respectively, for k = 1 to 5 N/m. Vtip-sample = +1 V.
Average of the whole
| Tip | Raw CNT | CNT-AuNPs | Substrate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pt/Ir | |||
| <Log(R)> | 5.3 | 5.7 | 4 |
| 2 × 105 | 5 × 105 | 1 × 104 | |
| Diamond | |||
| <Log(R)> | 4.3 | 4.5 | 4.3 |
| 2 × 104 | 3.2 × 104 | 2 × 104 |
Figure 2(a1, a2) AFM topographic images (1 × 1 μm. Same experimental parameters as for Figure 1.
Figure 3(a) Schematic view of the AFM tip and the «tip-CNT-substrate» junction. A bias voltage V is applied between the tip and the substrate, the arrows represent the direction of the current lines. (b) Series-parallel resistance network corresponding to setup scheme.
Figure 4Topography (left) and resistance maps (right) of raw CNTs and CNTs with AuNPs using a diamond tip for various polarizations in the range 1 to 6 V (scan size of 1 × 1 μm.
Figure 5Topography (left) and resistance maps (right) of raw CNTs and CNTs with AuNPs using a diamond tip for various polarizations between ±3 V. The scan length is 1 μm. For the electrical images obtained on CNTs with AuNPs, the resistance scale is plotted in the range of 104 to 106 Ω to enhance the contrast.
Mechanical and electrical parameters of the various materials used for the junction «tip-CNT-substrate», with E(Young's moduli), ν(Poisson's ratio's), rt (curvature radius), ρ (resistivity) and l (electron mean free path).
| ρ (Ω m) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Au | 78 | 0.42 | 90 | 2.35 × 10-8 | 36 | ||
| MWCNT | 10 | 0.28 | 12.5 | 10-6 | 80 | ||
| Diamond | 1063 | 0.1 | 150 | 4 × 10-5[ | 40 | ||
| Pt/Ir | 233.3 | 0.368 | 20 | 2.35 × 10-8 | 36 |
1from ref. [37]
2from ref. [21]
3from ref. [[38] (φCNT : 25 nm), [39-41]]
4from ref. [41]
5from ref. [42]
6from ref. [43-45]
7from ref. [46]
8from tip manufacturer
9from ref. [47] (we take account a ratio of Pt-20%Ir)
Calculation of the different contact pressure and radii for the tip-CNT, CNT-substrate and tip-substrate junction.
| Diamond–CNT | 1.8 | 3.1 | 2358 | 3975 |
| Pt/Ir–CNT | 2.1 | 3.5 | 1732 | 3118 |
| CNT–substrate | 2.4 | 4.1 | 1326 | 2272 |
| Diamond–substrate | 2.0 | 3.4 | 1910 | 3304 |
| Pt/Ir–substrate | 1.4 | 2.4 | 3898 | 6632 |
Results of the contact resistance calculations for each interface (see Equation 1).
| Digital | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 104 Ω | 104 Ω | 102 Ω | 102 Ω | ||||
| 110 kΩ | 37.1 kΩ | 3.9 kΩ | 1.4 kΩ | ||||
| 3 kΩ | 1 kΩ | ||||||
| 0.1 Ω | |||||||
| 84.9 kΩ | 29.4 kΩ | 183.2 Ω | 62.3 Ω | ||||
| 105 Ω | 105 Ω |