| Literature DB >> 25843548 |
Dumitru Dumcenco, Dmitry Ovchinnikov, Kolyo Marinov, Predrag Lazić1, Marco Gibertini, Nicola Marzari, Oriol Lopez Sanchez, Yen-Cheng Kung, Daria Krasnozhon, Ming-Wei Chen, Simone Bertolazzi, Philippe Gillet, Anna Fontcuberta i Morral, Aleksandra Radenovic, Andras Kis.
Abstract
Two-dimensional semiconductors such as MoS2 are an emerging material family with wide-ranging potential applications in electronics, optoelectronics, and energy harvesting. Large-area growth methods are needed to open the way to applications. Control over lattice orientation during growth remains a challenge. This is needed to minimize or even avoid the formation of grain boundaries, detrimental to electrical, optical, and mechanical properties of MoS2 and other 2D semiconductors. Here, we report on the growth of high-quality monolayer MoS2 with control over lattice orientation. We show that the monolayer film is composed of coalescing single islands with limited numbers of lattice orientation due to an epitaxial growth mechanism. Optical absorbance spectra acquired over large areas show significant absorbance in the high-energy part of the spectrum, indicating that MoS2 could also be interesting for harvesting this region of the solar spectrum and fabrication of UV-sensitive photodetectors. Even though the interaction between the growth substrate and MoS2 is strong enough to induce lattice alignment via van der Waals interaction, we can easily transfer the grown material and fabricate devices. Local potential mapping along channels in field-effect transistors shows that the single-crystal MoS2 grains in our film are well connected, with interfaces that do not degrade the electrical conductivity. This is also confirmed by the relatively large and length-independent mobility in devices with a channel length reaching 80 μm.Entities:
Keywords: Kelvin probe force microscopy; MoS2; electronic transport; epitaxial growth; grain boundaries; two-dimensional materials
Year: 2015 PMID: 25843548 PMCID: PMC4415455 DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.5b01281
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Nano ISSN: 1936-0851 Impact factor: 15.881
Figure 1Monolayer MoS2 growth with controlled lattice orientation. (a) Photograph of centimeter-scale monolayer MoS2 grown on sapphire. (b) Optical microscopy images from different regions of the sample showing incomplete coverage close to the edges (upper image, position marked by the circle in a) and full coverage close to the center of the growth substrate (lower image, position marked by the rectangle in a). Scale bar length is 20 μm on the top image and 10 μm for the bottom image. Original optical images were converted to grayscale, and the contrast was enhanced. (c) Optical microscopy image of monolayer MoS2 grains grown on atomically smooth sapphire. Scale bar length is 50 μm. Inset: RHEED pattern acquired on the CVD-grown sample showing a film with long-range structural order. (d) Atomic force microscope image of a monolayer MoS2 grain. Scale bar is 2 μm long. Inset: Line scan showing the thickness profile along the blue line in the AFM image. (e) High-resolution TEM image of a suspended MoS2 film showing the crystallinity of the sample. View of the structural model is overlaid. Scale bar is 0.5 nm long. (f) Orientation histogram based on the area shown in part c confirms that the majority of MoS2 grain edges are oriented along 0° and ±60° angles.
Figure 2Optical properties of large-area monolayer MoS2. (a) Raman spectra of as-grown monolayer MoS2 on sapphire and monolayer MoS2 exfoliated from bulk crystals and transferred onto sapphire. (b) Photoluminescence spectra of as-grown monolayer MoS2 on sapphire and monolayer MoS2 exfoliated from bulk crystals onto sapphire. Black lines in parts a and b correspond to fits. (c) UV–vis optical absorbance spectra acquired from large-area monolayer MoS2 showing the A and B absorption peaks due to band-edge excitons as well as C and D peaks associated with van Hove singularities of MoS2.
Figure 3Diffraction patterns from different island orientations. (a) Low-magnification TEM image of several neighboring MoS2 islands. The diffraction pattern acquired from the area denoted with the red circle is shown in the inset and corresponds to the most common arrangement between neighboring islands. Only one set of diffraction spots can be detected from such islands, indicating that their crystalline lattices are aligned. The MoS2 structure drawing indicates the lattice orientation within the single-crystal island and is not to scale. (b) Low-magnification TEM image and the corresponding diffraction patterns from two merging islands with their edges forming a 90° angle. Two sets of diffraction spots, rotated by 30°, can be observed, indicating a 30° lattice misorientation angle. (c) Schematic drawing showing the top view of relative lattice orientations between monolayer MoS2 and c-plane sapphire. In the case of the arrangement of the left-hand side, corresponding to lattice rotation angles θ = 0° and θ = 60°, the two lattices are commensurate. Two minority orientations can be observed in our sample, corresponding to a lattice rotation angle θ = 30° and θ = 90° (right-hand side).
Figure 4Binding energies for MoS2 and sapphire. Data are shown as a 3D surface and contour plot of relative binding energies for MoS2 on sapphire, for different relative lattice orientations and as a function of relative shift in x- and y-directions, corresponding to the lateral motion of the MoS2 monolayer on the surface of atomically smooth sapphire. Only the 0° and 60° orientations result in significant corrugation and substantial stable minima. The distance between MoS2 and sapphire is 3.24 Å, as obtained from DFT calculations.
Figure 5Mapping the local electrical properties across grain boundaries in large-area monolayer MoS2. (a) Local potential map (upper panel) and line scan across the red line (lower panel) showing the potential drop over the conductive channel of a biased field-effect transistor based on two merged MoS2 single crystals with the same lattice orientation. In this case, no grain boundary is expected. The smooth potential drop indicates the absence of abrupt changes of potential that would indicate the presence of an electrically resistive grain boundary. (b) Local potential map and line scan over two merged triangles with a 60° misorientation angle. This configuration is expected to result in a twin grain boundary. Its presence does not introduce an extra potential drop, indicating that it does not degrade the electrical conductivity of the material. (c) Local potential map and line scan over two merged triangles with a 30° misorientation angle. The presence of the grain boundary does not introduce an extra potential drop in the channel. Insets in line scan plots indicate relative orientations of MoS2 single crystals. Scale bars are 2 μm long.
Figure 6Electrical properties of large-area devices. Field-effect mobility as a function of channel length. Values are extracted from two-contact measurements performed on the device based on the continuous film shown in the inset with Au leads labeled 1–6. Red symbols correspond to values obtained using two nearest neighbor electrodes as source and drain terminals with the longest segment between electrodes 5 and 6 having a length of 39.7 μm. Black symbols denote values extracted by using other combinations of electrodes with the longest segment between terminals 1 and 6 having a length of 81.2 μm.