The growth of horizontal nanowires (NWs) guided by epitaxial and graphoepitaxial relations with the substrate is becoming increasingly attractive owing to the possibility of controlling their position, direction, and crystallographic orientation. In guided NWs, as opposed to the extensively characterized vertically grown NWs, there is an increasing need for understanding the relation between structure and properties, specifically the role of the epitaxial relation with the substrate. Furthermore, the uniformity of crystallographic orientation along guided NWs and over the substrate has yet to be checked. Here we perform highly sensitive second harmonic generation (SHG) polarimetry of polar and nonpolar guided ZnO NWs grown on R-plane and M-plane sapphire. We optically map large areas on the substrate in a nondestructive way and find that the crystallographic orientations of the guided NWs are highly selective and specific for each growth direction with respect to the substrate lattice. In addition, we perform SHG polarimetry along individual NWs and find that the crystallographic orientation is preserved along the NW in both polar and nonpolar NWs. While polar NWs show highly uniform SHG along their axis, nonpolar NWs show a significant change in the local nonlinear susceptibility along a few micrometers, reflected in a reduction of 40% in the ratio of the SHG along different crystal axes. We suggest that these differences may be related to strain accumulation along the nonpolar wires. We find SHG polarimetry to be a powerful tool to study both selectivity and uniformity of crystallographic orientations of guided NWs with different epitaxial relations.
The growth of horizontal nanowires (NWs) guided by epitaxial and graphoepitaxial relations with the substrate is becoming increasingly attractive owing to the possibility of controlling their position, direction, and crystallographic orientation. In guided NWs, as opposed to the extensively characterized vertically grown NWs, there is an increasing need for understanding the relation between structure and properties, specifically the role of the epitaxial relation with the substrate. Furthermore, the uniformity of crystallographic orientation along guided NWs and over the substrate has yet to be checked. Here we perform highly sensitive second harmonic generation (SHG) polarimetry of polar and nonpolar guided ZnO NWs grown on R-plane and M-plane sapphire. We optically map large areas on the substrate in a nondestructive way and find that the crystallographic orientations of the guided NWs are highly selective and specific for each growth direction with respect to the substrate lattice. In addition, we perform SHG polarimetry along individual NWs and find that the crystallographic orientation is preserved along the NW in both polar and nonpolar NWs. While polar NWs show highly uniform SHG along their axis, nonpolar NWs show a significant change in the local nonlinear susceptibility along a few micrometers, reflected in a reduction of 40% in the ratio of the SHG along different crystal axes. We suggest that these differences may be related to strain accumulation along the nonpolar wires. We find SHG polarimetry to be a powerful tool to study both selectivity and uniformity of crystallographic orientations of guided NWs with different epitaxial relations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Guided nanowires; polarimetry; second harmonic generation; strain; zinc oxide
The guided growth of horizontal
nanowires (NWs), in which assembly and alignment of the NWs are achieved
during the growth process, is attracting growing interest due to the
unique opportunity to eliminate the need for post-growth processes
as well as to gain deterministic control over their position, direction,
and length. Since its first demonstration by Nikoobakht and co-workers,[1] an increasing number of reports can be found
on the growth of horizontal NWs[2−19] and their direct integration into planar devices.[20−27] A vapor–liquid–solid (VLS) process, guided by the
surface, yields horizontal NWs with controlled directions and crystallographic
orientations, determined by the epitaxial and graphoepitaxial relations
with the substrate. Based on what is known from bulk and thin films,
the crystallographic orientation and epitaxial relations with the
substrate are expected to play an important role in determining the
electronic and optical properties of NWs.[28−31] Therefore, the guided growth
of horizontal NWs can be used as a way of controlling NWs properties.
However, in order to fulfill the potential of the guided growth approach
as a method to produce large arrays of aligned NWs with known properties,
the selectivity and uniformity of crystallographic orientations of
guided NWs must be studied.The mechanism that drives the growth
of lateral NWs is not yet
well understood. A few models describing vertical vs horizontal growth
have been proposed,[32−34] but as continuum models, they do not consider the
effect of epitaxy. The results accumulated so far[3,4,12,17,24,35] indicate that the growth
of horizontal NWs is strongly affected by epitaxial relations with
the underlying substrate, but what exactly determines the growth direction
and crystallographic orientation is not yet known nor can it be predicted.
For example, in vapor–solid (VS) planar growth of quasi-1D
islands,[36] there is a preferred elongation
along the direction with the lowest mismatch. On the other hand, in
VLS growth in systems with high lattice mismatch and low lattice symmetry,
the lowest mismatch is found across the NW rather than along it.[35] In systems where the overgrown crystal and the
substrate belong to the same crystal family and have a relatively
low lattice mismatch, planar NWs are relatively well matched in both
longitudinal and transversal directions. In this case, it is difficult
to determine the direction in which lattice matching is more important,
and NWs can grow in different directions on the same substrate. Moreover,
in cases where more than one crystallographic orientation is stable
enough to form in a certain direction, the uniformity of the crystal
orientation along the growth direction of the same NW cannot be taken
for granted, and the question whether guided NWs sustain their crystallographic
orientation along the growth axis remains an open one.As opposed
to vertical NWs, which can be placed on a grid and examined
by high-resolution transmission electron microscope (HRTEM) to determine
the crystallographic orientation, guided NWs lay strongly bound to
the substrate. Therefore, their structural characterization by TEM
is more challenging, usually requiring the preparation of a thin electron-transparent
lamella across the NWs using a focused ion beam (FIB). This method
has a few major drawbacks: (i) it is completely destructive, (ii)
it is extremely time-consuming, (iii) it is limited to a small region
on the substrate, (iv) when cut across the transverse direction of
the NWs, only one very specific position along the NWs is probed,
and (v) when cut along the NW growth direction, only a single NW is
probed. Optical noninvasive methods for structural study, such as
Raman spectroscopy, can be highly effective for the determination
of crystallographic orientations when performed on free-standing NWs
placed on a substrate of choice[37] but are
very challenging in the characterization of guided NWs due to the
strong signal from the substrate. It is thus important to develop
a fast, robust, noninvasive, and highly sensitive structural characterization
method to study guided NWs over large areas and along single NWs.SHG has become widely used for the study of crystalline structures,[38] specifically nanostructures,[39] where direct structural probing becomes more challenging
and where phase matching considerations are absent. Since SHG strongly
depends on polarization, polarimetric measurements can serve as the
tool of choice for highly sensitive structural studies. The fast measurement,
which allows statistical study on a large number of nanostructures
at the single nanostructure level, its nondestructive nature, and
the rather simple optical setup have rendered this tool very useful
for crystallographic characterization. Several studies in recent years
have used SHG to determine crystal phase,[40−44] crystal orientation,[41−51] and defects[42,44,51,52] within nanostructures of many types, such
as quantum dots, NWs, and molecular crystals. Nevertheless, to the
best of our knowledge, SHG polarimetry has not yet been used to study
horizontally grown NWs. This method should be particularly interesting
where more than one growth direction exists, to study the effects
of different epitaxial relations with the substrate on the growth
direction and crystallographic orientation.We showed before
that ZnO NWs can grow horizontally in a wurtzite
(WZ) structure on various smooth and faceted sapphire substrates.[4] Specifically, guided ZnO NWs on M-plane (101̅0) sapphire grow in four perpendicular directions,
±[12̅10]Al and ±[0001]Al, yielding two types of NWs, termed
either polar or nonpolar. “Polar” wires are those which
grow in the direction of the crystalline polarity (c-axis, i.e., [0001]ZnO). “Nonpolar” wires
are those who grow perpendicular to the direction of crystalline polarity
(e.g., [12̅10]ZnO). Note that these wires exhibit
the same polar structure and are only nonpolar along the growth axis.
As a result of these respective relations, the longitudinal lattice
mismatch of the polar NWs (9.34%) is the transverse lattice mismatch
of the nonpolar ones, and vice versa (0.02%).[4] For guided ZnO NWs, the two mentioned options are stable enough
to form under the same growth conditions. This unique system provides
us with the opportunity to study the effect of NW–substrate
mismatch along the growth axis of epitaxial guided NWs on their structure
and orientation.In this work we use SHG polarimetry to investigate
guided ZnO NWs
grown on different sapphire planes. As a first step, we confirm the
structure of the ZnO crystal and determine its Euler angles with respect
to the lab frame. We map a large area of our samples and find a high
selectivity and specificity in the crystallographic orientations of
the NWs with respect to the substrate lattice directions along which
they grow ([0001]ZnO along ±[12̅10]Al and [12̅10]ZnO along
±[0001]Al). We determine
that the crystallographic orientation along the growth direction of
both polar and nonpolar NWs is kept constant throughout their entire
length. To quantitatively analyze the SHG along guided NWs, we include
the geometry of the NW cross section and the dielectric effect of
the substrate on the electric field distribution inside the NW. Polar
NWs show a highly uniform SHG polar distribution along their growth
axis, whereas nonpolar NWs show gradual but significant change. Uniform
and nonuniform photoluminescence (PL) spectra along the same polar
and nonpolar NWs, respectively, are consistent with these results.
We attribute these differences to strain, either accumulated or relaxed
according to the different lattice mismatch in the two growth directions.
Small lattice variations are detectable owing to the very high sensitivity
of SHG polarimetry to any changes in the structure and symmetry of
the hexagonal crystal.Guided ZnO NWs were grown by chemical
vapor deposition from Au
catalyst, on R (11̅02) and M (101̅0) planes of sapphire by a previously reported process,[4] slightly modified (see Supporting Information for synthesis details). After the synthesis, the
guided NWs were characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
NWs grow horizontally and aligned from the gold nanoparticles. Their
diameters were found to be in the range 30–80 nm, and their
typical length is around 10 μm. Figure a shows a typical SEM micrograph of guided
ZnO NWs on R-plane (11̅02) sapphire. NWs grow
with polar [0001]ZnO orientations along two opposite directions
±[1̅101]Al. On M-plane
(101̅0) sapphire (Figure b) the guided NWs with polar [0001]ZnO orientation
grow along the nonpolar ±[12̅10]Aldirection and NWs with a nonpolar [12̅10]ZnO orientation grow along the polar ±[0001]Al direction.[1,4,12,53]
Figure 1
Guided ZnO nanowires
with controlled orientation on different sapphire
substrates. SEM micrographs of ZnO NWs grown on (a) R-plane sapphire and (b) M-plane sapphire and their
corresponding crystalline orientations described by the inset. Scale
bars are 2 μm.
Guided ZnO nanowires
with controlled orientation on different sapphire
substrates. SEM micrographs of ZnO NWs grown on (a) R-plane sapphire and (b) M-plane sapphire and their
corresponding crystalline orientations described by the inset. Scale
bars are 2 μm.We use SHG polarimetry for the crystallographic study of
guided
NWs. The second harmonic induced (SH) polarization is described by P(2ω) = ε0χ(2)E1(ω)E2(ω).
Here, E1 and E2 stand
for the two fundamental fields with frequency ω, and χ(2) is a rank 3 tensor for the second-order nonlinear susceptibility.
It is more convenient to work with the contracted rank 2 representation P(2ω) = 2ε0dE(ω)2, where E(ω)2 = (E2, E2, E2, 2EE, 2EE, 2EE) and d is a 3 ×
6 matrix for the second-order nonlinear susceptibility. Every crystal
structure is characterized by a different d matrix,
which determines the SH response to the inducing fields. For the WZ
structure (6mm symmetry group) the d matrix contains only three independent elements and has the general
form ofWhen
Kleinman symmetry applies (corresponding,
in this case, to the absence of a two-photon absorption resonance),
then d15 = d31, and the d matrix contains only two independent
elements d15 and d33:[54]The
contribution of these elements manifests
itself in the SHG response. To individually measure these matrix elements,
one needs to change the polarization of the inducing laser and measure
the intensity of the induced SH polarization. The obtained curve is
then fitted to a model considering the magnitude of the tensor elements,
the crystal shape, and its spatial and crystalline orientation. Since
the crystallographic orientation relative to the lab frame directly
affects the measured SHG, in many cases this orientation can be identified.
SHG is well described by the above equations, so it is possible to
simulate the measured SH intensity as a function of polarization angle
(after a detailed consideration of all the needed corrections). Fitting
the best simulation to the measured data is used to determine the
structure and crystalline orientation. More details about simulation
and fitting can be found in the Supporting Information. SHG in noncentrosymmetric nanostructures can originate from both
its surface and volume. Nevertheless, surface SHG is far less efficient
and is more pronounced in centrosymmetric nano-objects.[55] In the case of semiconductor quantum dots, it
has been shown that the bulk contribution dominates over the surface
for diameters as small as 5 nm.[56] Thus,
for the sizes of NWs discussed here, the volumetric SHG contribution
greatly exceeds the surface contribution, and we can safely ignore
the latter. We also note that the sapphire substrate (symmetry group
3̅m) has a vanishing χ(2) and
hence does not significantly contribute to the measured SHG signal.[54] Nevertheless, we show below that the presence
of the sapphire substrate does affect the field distribution inside
the NW and thus plays a significant role in the SHG from guided NWs.Figure a describes
our experimental setup used for SHG polarization measurements. We
employed an 80 MHz, 100 fs, Ti-sapphire pulsed laser at wavelength
of 950 nm to generate SH from a single ZnO NW. The excitation wavelength
was chosen so as to avoid two-photon absorption and thus fulfill the
Kleinman symmetry conditions. The sample was placed facing down on
top of a glass coverslip, to eliminate the effect of birefringence
of the sapphire substrate, in an inverted microscope with an x–y piezo stage. The laser beam was passed through
a rotatable half-wave plate and focused on the sample using a 20×,
0.5 NA objective lens (we chose low NA to avoid excitation and detection
of out-of-plane dipoles, yet not too low to deteriorate the optical
resolution and the signal collection efficiency). The fwhm of the
beam diameter at the focal point was measured to be 1.2 μm.
The induced SHG light at 475 nm was epi-detected, filtered, and sampled
through a linear polarizer (analyzer). A fiber-coupled single-photon
detector (SPD) connected to a time-correlated single-photon counter
(TCSPC) was used to measure and count the photon flux. The input polarization
was rotated while the analyzer sampled the two perpendicular polarizations, x and y.
Figure 2
SHG polarimetry measurements. (a) Schematic
representation of the
optical setup used for SHG polarimetric measurements. An angular description
of the angles used to describe the crystalline orientation is depicted
in (b). Typical polarimetric scan for (c) bulk sample, (d) polar NW,
and (e) nonpolar NW. The polar axis is the input polarization angle
of the fundamental field, the blue curve is a measurement of SHG polarized
in the x lab axis, and the red curve is the y-polarized SHG.
SHG polarimetry measurements. (a) Schematic
representation of the
optical setup used for SHG polarimetric measurements. An angular description
of the angles used to describe the crystalline orientation is depicted
in (b). Typical polarimetric scan for (c) bulk sample, (d) polar NW,
and (e) nonpolar NW. The polar axis is the input polarization angle
of the fundamental field, the blue curve is a measurement of SHG polarized
in the x lab axis, and the red curve is the y-polarized SHG.Typical polar plots, in which SH intensity is plotted as
a function
of polarization angle, can be seen in Figure c–e, where the blue line represents x-polarized SHG signal and the red line is the y-polarized signal. It should be noted that the symmetry of the polar
plots (e.g., two-lobed or four-lobed) does not directly reflect the
symmetry of the crystal, but rather on a specific projection onto
the lab x–y plane. The observed patterns are
indeed characteristic of the WZ crystal structure. The lab frame of
reference was such that the sample plane was specified as x–y and the laser propagation as z. To interpret the polarimetric results and find the crystal orientation,
we have used rotation matrices in the z–y′–z″ convention to rotate the frames of reference
between three frames: lab, NW, and crystal (for more details see the Supporting Information). The inducing and induced
fields were projected on these axes frames. The NW frame is defined
by the long axis of the NW. The crystal frame is defined by the three
angles α, β, and γ, describing the main crystallographic
axes of the crystal relative to the lab frame (the angles are illustrated
in Figure b). After
determining the orientation of the c-axis of the
WZ structure, the sample was rotated such that it aligns with the x-direction of the lab frame. This way, the polar wires
(either on R- or M-plane) were aligned
along the lab x-axis, and the nonpolar NWs on M-plane were aligned along the lab y-axis.
(see Figure a). The
dramatic differences between polar and nonpolar wires seen in Figure d,e are mostly due
to a geometric effect as discussed in detail below.To study
the selectivity of crystallographic orientations throughout
the sample, we use the x–y nanometric stage
and scan large areas of the sample at a fixed polarization. Figure a shows such large
area (30 μm × 50 μm) scan of guided ZnO NWs on R-plane sapphire. The polarization angle for excitation
and detection was chosen to be 0° (along the x-axis) to maximize the intensity. Very long ZnO NWs sometimes exhibit
a gently tapered shape due to the addition of material from the gas
phase directly to the solid side-walls of the wire. This can be related
to a gradual drop in the SHG intensity (due to the reduction in excitation
volume) along the longer NWs in Figure a. Figures b and 3c present medium and small area
scans on M-plane, where both polar and nonpolar NWs
are observed. In this sample, the wires are relatively shorter and
care was taken to measure NWs with no significant height variation
along them as measured by AFM. Figures b and 3c show that the SHG intensity
is highly uniform along the wire. After mapping a desired area, we
use the piezo stage to position the laser beam at a certain point
and acquire a polarimetric measurement to determine the crystal structure
and orientation. More than 50 different NWs were examined by SHG polarimetry
on both R- and M-planes. All showed
a four-lobed shape, typical for the 6mm point group.
The detection of the small lobes in polar NWs is difficult to achieve
due to the strong reduction of the signal perpendicular to the c-axis (Figure d). The high stability of the ZnO NWs in air and the choice
of excitation wavelength far from resonance enable the use of high
laser intensities. Along with the use of TCSPC, the result is a very
high signal-to-noise ratio, which allows us to explore the ratio of
the lobes for the polar NWs and compare to the nonpolar NWs. Fitting
the four-lobed shape of the SHG polarimetry to a simulation confirmed
that indeed all NWs have a WZ structure with their c-axis pointing along the ±[1̅101]Al or the ±[12̅10]Al directions of the R- and M-plane sapphire, respectively. The orientations found are consistent
with our HRTEM results on a thin slice along both polar and nonpolar
NWs (Supporting Information) and the thorough
crystallographic analysis previously reported.[4] These findings show very high selectivity of crystallographic orientations
on two different planes of sapphire and indicate a highly selective
growth process driven by epitaxial relations with the substrate.
Figure 3
SHG mapping
of guided NWs. (a) Wide area scan (50 × 30 μm2) of ZnO on R-plane sapphire. (b) Medium
size scan (23 × 13 μm2) and (c) single NW scan
(9 × 4 μm2) of ZnO on M-plane
sapphire. Scale bars are of 10/5/1 μm, respectively.
SHG mapping
of guided NWs. (a) Wide area scan (50 × 30 μm2) of ZnO on R-plane sapphire. (b) Medium
size scan (23 × 13 μm2) and (c) single NW scan
(9 × 4 μm2) of ZnO on M-plane
sapphire. Scale bars are of 10/5/1 μm, respectively.Although the crystal polar axis points to the same
direction with
respect to the lab frame, in the polar NWs it aligns with the long
axis and in the nonpolar ones with the in-plane short axis. This results
in a fundamental difference between the nonlinear response of polar
and nonpolar NWs. Under the electrostatic approximation, the effective
electric field inside a dielectric cylinder becomes E = E∥ + fE⊥. Here, E∥ and E⊥ are the fields parallel and perpendicular
to the long cylinder axis just outside the cylinder, and f = 2/(1 + εm/ε0) is the reduction
factor in the perpendicular direction. εm and ε0 are the medium and the environment dielectric constants,
respectively. Similarly to the perpendicular field reduction at excitation,
this 1D geometric effect also reduces the strength of the induced
SHG fields in the same direction, with the appropriate dielectric
constant for the doubled optical frequency ε(2ω). Since
the field is reduced twice in this second-order process, the consideration
of the geometric effect becomes highly significant when analyzing
SHG from NWs. For example, when excitation and detection are both
done parallel to the long axis, SHG is not affected. However, when
both excitation and detection are along the short axis, the most drastic
reduction occurs (|f(2ω)f2(ω)|2). Here, we experimentally show an example
of the strength of this 1D geometric effect. Our measurements show
that the ratios between the SHG intensity excited by x and y polarizations (I(0°)/(90°))
are extremely different for the bulk sample, polar NWs, and nonpolar
NWs: typically 8, 100, and 1, respectively (Figure c–e).The electrostatic approximation
applied above is valid when the
wavelength of light λ = λ/nZnO inside the medium is much larger than the diameter a of the NW. Unlike recent work on tapered nanobelts,[39] where the geometrical field factor along a nanobelt as
a function of its width was inferred, here we work in the regime of a ≪ λm, where f does not depend on diameter. All the NWs examined in this paper
have diameters well below the wavelength inside the medium. Their
height was measured using AFM and found to be less than 80 nm. Overall,
TEM cross-sectional analysis in previous study[4] indicates that the width is not larger than 50 nm. As a consequence,
we have limited ourselves to a size-independent factor for all NWs.Another effect that needs to be addressed is that guided NWs are
in contact with a dielectric substrate (ε0 = ∼3.1
for sapphire at optical frequencies[57]).
Therefore, they cannot be treated as a cylinder in vacuum. In order
to obtain the appropriate factor f, we performed
a simulation of the electrostatic fields inside a trapezoidal cross
section (Figure b),
typical of ZnO NWs lying on a sapphire substrate with growth orientation
[0001]ZnO as can be seen from the cross-section TEM image
(Figure a). Although
only a minute distortion of the directions of the fields near the
edges and corners was observed, the field strength was not uniform
as in the case of cylindrical cross section in vacuum. The averaged
field reduction factors for a guided ZnO NW were found to be 0.62|ω and 0.59|2ω, significantly higher
than 0.42|ω and 0.38|2ω obtained
for a cylinder in a vacuum. This substrate dielectric effect is significant
when interpreting the SHG polarimetric response of nanostructures;
nevertheless, it is often disregarded or being misused in analyses. Figure c shows the importance
of taking the correct field factor by plotting fits to data of the
two cases discussed above: trapezoidal cross section of ZnO NW on
a sapphire substrate and ZnO cylinder in vacuum. Given a reasonable
constant value of d15/d33 = −0.33, it is clear that selecting the right
factor is important for getting better quantitative understanding.
The polarimetry measurement, however, cannot be solely explained by
the geometrical correction without considering an effective modification
of the d matrix elements ratio (d15/d33) as well.
Figure 4
Effect of substrate
and cross section on the SHG of guided NWs.
(a) TEM micrograph of guided ZnO NW on M-plane sapphire.
Scale bar is 10 nm. (b) Simulated field for a cross section of a ZnO
NW, lying on a sapphire substrate in air. The white arrows and the
color scale represent the field vectors and normalized intensities,
respectively. Intensity value of unity stands for the unperturbed
field. (c) The x-polarized signal of a polarimetric
measurement of a nonpolar NW (blue dots) fitted with geometrical factors
obtained from the simulation in (b) (solid blue line) and geometrical
factors of cylinder in vacuum (purple dashed line). The fit was done
using a constant ratio of d31/d33 = −0.33.
Effect of substrate
and cross section on the SHG of guided NWs.
(a) TEM micrograph of guided ZnO NW on M-plane sapphire.
Scale bar is 10 nm. (b) Simulated field for a cross section of a ZnO
NW, lying on a sapphire substrate in air. The white arrows and the
color scale represent the field vectors and normalized intensities,
respectively. Intensity value of unity stands for the unperturbed
field. (c) The x-polarized signal of a polarimetric
measurement of a nonpolar NW (blue dots) fitted with geometrical factors
obtained from the simulation in (b) (solid blue line) and geometrical
factors of cylinder in vacuum (purple dashed line). The fit was done
using a constant ratio of d31/d33 = −0.33.Each polarimetric measurement was fitted with simulation
of three
angles of crystalline orientation α, β, and γ (although
γ has no effect on the SHG from 6mm symmetry
group), the effective d15/d33, noise, and a global amplitude as free variables. Our
simulation accounts for the local field reduction at both the fundamental
and SHG fields as well as for the collection efficiency of the SHG
dipole radiation by our objective at both detection polarizations
and for input power differences between polarizations (more details
can be found in the Supporting Information). Our fitted parameters for a bulk ZnO standard sample (A-plane ZnO, MTI Corp.) confirmed the known crystalline
angles, and the ratio d15/d33 = −0.38, in good agreement with the values reported
in the literature for bulk: −0.33 to −0.31.[58,59] Polar NWs on both R- and M-plane
were examined. Both have been fitted to simulation and their d-matrix elements ratio d15/d33 was inferred to be in the range of −0.27
to −0.4. Nonpolar NWs grown on M-plane sapphire
were also examined and the above ratio ranged between −0.15
and −0.45. These values for polar and nonpolar NWs are in agreement
with the reported values for bulk and with a report on NWs that inferred
a ratio of −0.24 to −0.5 for 80–130 nm diameter
NWs.[60] Notably, however, the large variation
of this fitting parameter, particularly among the nonpolar wires,
hints at a larger structural nonuniformity.To further investigate
the differences between polar and nonpolar
NWs, we mapped over 10 NWs grown on M-plane and performed
longitudinal polarimetric scans along each examined NW with a resolution
of 0.5 μm. Since each point along the wire corresponds to a
specific time during the growth of the wire, it opens up the possibility
of gaining insight into the dynamics of guided NWs growth. Figure a,b presents the
intensity ratio of the vertical and the horizontal lobes of the polar
plots of the x-polarized signal I(90°)/I(0°) (blue squares) along the wire
for both types of wires as a function of the position away from the
catalyst. On the same plot we display the inferred d15/d33 ratio from simulation
(magenta squares). We note that while the ratio I(90°)/I(0°) for polar and nonpolar NWs
is substantially different, the ratio d15/d33 is in the same range. This is due
to the geometric effect, which is included when extracting the inferred
matrix elements. The area where the gold catalyst is found is excluded
from this analysis. Polar wires, in Figure a, show very little variation of the intensity
ratio along the wire (standard deviation of 5%) and similarly for
the inferred d ratios. This is indicative of stable
homogeneous growth, where the crystalline structure and orientations
do not spatially vary. On the other hand, a 40% decrease in the intensity
ratio is clearly observed along few micrometers of the nonpolar wire. Figure c illustrates this
variation in intensity by showing the polar plots for the wire described
in Figure b. The nine
positions along the wire are normalized by I(0°)
in a single graph revealing the gradual change in the ratio I(90°)/I(0°). The small polar
plot insets further illustrate this. We note that all the examined
nonpolar NWs showed similar monotonic decrease in the intensity ratio,
although the ratios slightly differ from one another (Supporting Information). The decrease in the
intensity ratio was fully reproducible upon repeated measurements
regardless of the scan direction.
Figure 5
SHG polarimetry along ZnO NWs. Plots of
the intensity ratio of
the SHG polarimetric scan (of the x analyzer), I(90°)/I(0°) in blue, and the
inferred d elements ratio, d15/d33, in magenta, for (a) polar
and (b) nonpolar NWs. Small insets explain the scan direction of NW
plotted from left to right. (c) An angular dependence of the analyzer x measured intensity for nine points along the nonpolar
NW from (b), 0.5 μm apart. Insets: the complete polar plots
of the first and last points (blue dots are data points, and the fit
is solid blue line).
SHG polarimetry along ZnO NWs. Plots of
the intensity ratio of
the SHG polarimetric scan (of the x analyzer), I(90°)/I(0°) in blue, and the
inferred d elements ratio, d15/d33, in magenta, for (a) polar
and (b) nonpolar NWs. Small insets explain the scan direction of NW
plotted from left to right. (c) An angular dependence of the analyzer x measured intensity for nine points along the nonpolar
NW from (b), 0.5 μm apart. Insets: the complete polar plots
of the first and last points (blue dots are data points, and the fit
is solid blue line).As mentioned earlier, we work in the range of a ≪ λm where f does not depend
on diameter and SHG in these sizes is mainly a function of the volumetric
χ(2). In addition, AFM scans along the NWs did not
reveal any gradual change in thickness. Thus, the change along nonpolar
NWs cannot be explained by geometric change along these wires. In
principle, the gradual change of the intensity ratio between the vertical
and horizontal lobes can be explained by a rigid rotation (constant d) of the crystal. Using our
simulation and assuming a rigid rotation along the NW, we found that
only rotation of the c-axis around the long axis
of the NW, by allowing β to change along the NW, could explain
the observed change presented in Figure b. In order to quantitatively account for
the observed change, the c-axis should be allowed
to rotate 15–20° along 5 μm. To examine this possibility,
we cut a longitudinal lamella along the same NW and examined it using
HRTEM. We found no evidence for such rotation of the c-axis. In fact, no evidence for any rotation was found by examining
FFT of the HRTEM micrographs taken at several points along the NW.
Thus, we conclude that the crystallographic orientation is preserved
along the NW and that the gradual change has a different origin, presumably
involving a change in the d matrix elements along
the NW.The fact that the two types of wires grow under the
exact same
conditions suggests that growth in different directions along the
substrate affect the SHG not only in dictating the crystallographic
orientation but also by introducing strain according to the different
lattice mismatch in the two directions. SHG is extremely sensitive
to crystallographic deformation, as shown in a recent report that
underscored the high sensitivity of SHG polarimetry to smallest strains
in the order of 10–3 nm.[61] Both contraction and stretching are expected to compromise the symmetry
of the crystal and thus change the values of the d matrix elements. Contraction or stretching of the unit cell in the
longitudinal direction also cause stretching or contraction in the
transverse direction, respectively, according to Poisson ratio. Accordingly,
the main axes of the crystal perpendicular to the c-axis (x and y of the crystal)
are not symmetric as in unstrained ZnO, and hence the 6mm point group symmetry is reduced to 2 mm. Under the 2 mm symmetry,
there are three independent matrix elements: d15(= d31);d24(= d32);d33. Unfortunately, when examining the equations the fact the c-axis lies in the sample plane is hindering us from inferring
both of the ratios d15/d33 and d24/d33, but rather these are reflected in a single measurable
parameter deff/d33 = (d15 cos2 γ
+ d24 sin2 γ)/d33. Recalling, γ is the angle of rotation
around the c-axis. Strain was also shown to remarkably
deform both the ZnO NWs and the substrate when grown on A-plane sapphire.[12] Similarly, NWs in this
work are expected to maintain some level of strain. This could explain
the variation of the d matrix elements ratio along
the nonpolar NWs despite the preservation of the crystallographic
orientation along them.Interestingly, the variation of d15/d33 along the
wire, which is prominent
in nonpolar wires, is absent from the polar wires. This may be attributed
to the fact that the M-plane sapphire substrate mismatch
with the crystalline ZnO is found to be very different in the two
directions observed, dictating different epitaxial relations that
can affect strain accumulation or relaxation. For example, in ZnO
thin films on R-plane sapphire, the strain fully
relaxes in one direction through misfit dislocations, while in the
perpendicular direction strain remains.[62] In guided NWs that grow in two perpendicular directions with the
reverse longitudinal and transverse mismatch values, we can expect
different strain accumulation along the two types of wires. If the
longitudinal strain is initially too low to be relaxed by misfit dislocations,
it can accumulate as the wire grows longer and deform the crystal
further and might lead to the observed gradual change for the nonpolar
wires. To examine this possibility, we cut a longitudinal lamella
along both polar and nonpolar NWs and performed HRTEM study. We found
that indeed in the polar NW periodic misfit dislocations appear in
a 11:12 ratio, which is in good agreement with the mismatch in this
direction, indicating a strain relaxation mechanism. For the nonpolar
NWs, the interface could not be inspected in details due to a blurry
region in the lamella. We have tried to find any structural changes
along them, specifically by measuring the interplanar distances at
several points along the wires; however, the TEM analysis shows no
change in the lattice parameters along the wire within the error range
(more details and results can be found in the Supporting Information). This may indicate that SHG polarimetry
is sensitive to very small strains, beyond the accuracy of our HRTEM
measurements.Despite the lack of information provided by TEM
regarding the gradual
change of SHG along the nonpolar NWs, PL measurement turn out to be
more revealing. PL in ZnO may originate from both the near band-edge
emission (NBE) at wavelength of ∼380 nm and also from various
defect states emissions (DSE). Such states include interstitial atoms
and vacancies of both Zn and O in many electronic charge configurations.[63] The DSE is wide in spectrum and appears around
450–700 nm. PL of defects in NWs is attributed mostly to surface
states due to the rather high surface-to-volume ratio for defects
concentration and enables the exploration of the properties of the
surface. PL measurements were done using a micro-Raman/micro-PL system
(Horiba LabRAM HR Evolution). A 325 nm laser was focused on the NW
through a reflective objective lens. PL was collected using the same
objective and sent to a 300 lines/mm grating and an EMCCD camera.
Image processing produced a calibrated spectrum. The wires were scanned
with a piezo stage and at each position a spectrum was acquired. Both
polar and nonpolar wires were oriented in the same direction to avoid
different excitation due to the objective lens shape. The NBE of both
polar and nonpolar NWs is observed at ∼375 nm, slightly blue-shifted
from the typical 380 nm emission of ZnO. Quantum confinement can be
ruled out because the diameter of the wires is larger than the exciton
Bohr radius. We observed in the past[4] that
vertically grown ZnO NWs from the same sample, which are assumed to
be strain-free, also show a slight blue-shift in their NBE. This indicates
that the observed blue-shift is not due to strain. Alternatively,
the blue-shift may be due to a Burstein–Moss effect, which
was observed for small diameter ZnO NWs.[64] This effect is relevant for both polar and nonpolar NWs.The
differences between the two types of NWs manifest themselves
in the DSE emission. Results show that the ratio between DSE and NBE
in polar NWs in both M- and R-planes
(not shown) is much higher (Figure a,d), indicating that more electrons are trapped in
defect states. In addition, PL area scans (Figure b,e) along the NWs exhibited more differences
between polar and nonpolar wires. Here, we present the normalized
visible spectrum along two wires, polar and nonpolar. In the former,
the spectra seem very uniform, while in the latter, the spectra changes
along the wire. A sharp variation in emission spectra is seen here
and also in several other nonpolar wires examined. The uniformity
and nonuniformity of PL from polar and nonpolar NWs, respectively,
is consistent with the SHG polarimetric longitudinal scans. To further
elucidate this observation, spectra in specific positions along the
wire are displayed in Figure c,f. We consider those spectra variations to be dominated
either by surface variations, such as different facets exposed at
the surface, or induced by a change in oxygen vacancies and interstitials
concentrations, with emission wavelength close to the 520 and 580
nm lines of oxygen defects.[63] Although
it may simply be a surface effect, this observation is yet another
evidence of the nonuniform growth of the nonpolar NWs, in comparison
to the polar ones.
Figure 6
PL along ZnO NWs. Photoluminescence spectrum of (a) polar
and (d)
nonpolar NWs. Longitudinal spectral scan of (b) polar and (e) nonpolar
NWs. Visible spectra of two points along the wire for (c) polar and
(f) nonpolar NWs.
PL along ZnO NWs. Photoluminescence spectrum of (a) polar
and (d)
nonpolar NWs. Longitudinal spectral scan of (b) polar and (e) nonpolar
NWs. Visible spectra of two points along the wire for (c) polar and
(f) nonpolar NWs.To conclude, SHG polarimetry
is found to be a powerful, noninvasive,
and highly sensitive method for the characterization of guided NWs.
Mapping of crystallographic orientations over large areas of NWs assembly
and along individual NWs, enables the study of crystallographic selectivity,
specificity, and uniformity over the sample and along single NWs.
We find that the guided growth of ZnO NWs on both R- and M-plane sapphire is highly selective and that
crystallographic orientation is determined by the epitaxial relations
with the sapphire. The crystallographic orientation was found to be
preserved along the NW. The high sensitivity of SHG polarimetry to
the crystal structure and symmetry uncovers previously unexplored
differences between NWs epitaxialy guided in different orientations,
grown under the exact same conditions. While polar NWs are highly
uniform, nonpolar NWs show gradual variation in their nonlinear properties
along the growth direction. Variations in the photoluminescence along
the NWs are consistent with the observation of the nonuniform SHG
along the nonpolar NWs. Considering all of our findings and the nature
of bulk SHG, we suggest that the changes in the nonpolar NWs polarimetric
measurements along the wires may be related to crystal strain that
is not fully relaxed in this growth environment and configuration.
These findings indicate the important role of the substrate beyond
the control over direction and orientation and show the relation between
crystallographic orientation and properties of guided NWs. On the
one hand, the fact that SHG polarimetry can be more sensitive to structural,
compositional, mechanical, or electronic changes than other techniques
(e.g., TEM, XPS, EDS, etc.) makes it difficult to independently identify
the origin of certain SHG changes over different regions of the same
sample. On the other hand, the ability to inspect a large number of
NWs and detect small variations in crystalline nanostructures with
an all-optical setup demonstrates the power of SHG polarimetry for
similar studies.
Authors: Sophie Brasselet; Véronique Le Floc'h; François Treussart; Jean-François Roch; Joseph Zyss; Estelle Botzung-Appert; Alain Ibanez Journal: Phys Rev Lett Date: 2004-05-19 Impact factor: 9.161