Edge structures are low-dimensional defects unavoidable in layered materials of the transition metal dichalcogenides (TMD) family. Among the various types of such structures, the armchair (AC) and zigzag (ZZ) edge types are the most common. It has been predicted that the presence of intrinsic strain localized along these edges structures can have direct implications for the customization of their electronic properties. However, pinning down the relation between local structure and electronic properties at these edges is challenging. Here, we quantify the local strain field that arises at the edges of MoS2 flakes by combining aberration-corrected transmission electron microscopy (TEM) with the geometrical-phase analysis (GPA) method. We also provide further insight on the possible effects of such edge strain on the resulting electronic behavior by means of electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) measurements. Our results reveal that the two-dominant edge structures, ZZ and AC, induce the formation of different amounts of localized strain fields. We also show that by varying the free edge curvature from concave to convex, compressive strain turns into tensile strain. These results pave the way toward the customization of edge structures in MoS2, which can be used to engineer the properties of layered materials and thus contribute to the optimization of the next generation of atomic-scale electronic devices built upon them.
Edge structures are low-dimensional defects unavoidable in layered materials of the transition metal dichalcogenides (TMD) family. Among the various types of such structures, the armchair (AC) and zigzag (ZZ) edge types are the most common. It has been predicted that the presence of intrinsic strain localized along these edges structures can have direct implications for the customization of their electronic properties. However, pinning down the relation between local structure and electronic properties at these edges is challenging. Here, we quantify the local strain field that arises at the edges of MoS2 flakes by combining aberration-corrected transmission electron microscopy (TEM) with the geometrical-phase analysis (GPA) method. We also provide further insight on the possible effects of such edge strain on the resulting electronic behavior by means of electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) measurements. Our results reveal that the two-dominant edge structures, ZZ and AC, induce the formation of different amounts of localized strain fields. We also show that by varying the free edge curvature from concave to convex, compressive strain turns into tensile strain. These results pave the way toward the customization of edge structures in MoS2, which can be used to engineer the properties of layered materials and thus contribute to the optimization of the next generation of atomic-scale electronic devices built upon them.
Entities:
Keywords:
Transition-metal dichalcogenides; aberration-corrected transmission electron microscopy; edge structures; electron energy loss spectroscopy; strain
Layered materials
of the transition-metal
dichalcogenides (TMDs) family have experienced an impressive boost
in the recent years motivated by their striking physical functionalities.
In particular, MoS2 has become a very promising material
exhibiting a wide range of possibilities in terms of applications
from catalysis[1,2] to electronic[3−5] and optical[6,7] devices. For instance, when MoS2 is thinned down to a
single monolayer (ML), its indirect band gap switches to a direct
band gap[8,9] of around 1.88 eV.Recently, significant
attention has been devoted to a specific
type of low-dimensional defects, unavoidable in TMDs, known as the
edge structures, which are also present in other important layered
materials such as graphene.[10−13] These defects arise due to the lack of inversion
symmetry in TMDs, which leads in turn to the formation of different
edge configurations. Among the various types of possible edge terminations,
the specific structures that exhibit a higher degree of symmetry are
the so-called armchair (AC) and zigzag (ZZ) structures.Remarkably,
rather than representing a bottleneck for the customization
of TMD-based devices, these edge structures allow the tailoring of
their associated electronic properties[14,15] as well as
their chemical reactivity.[16] For instance,
carrier transport in graphene has been demonstrated to depend drastically
on its specific edge structures.[17−19] Another example is provided
by triangular MoS2 nanocrystals deposited on Au (111) substrate,[20] which exhibit the presence of metallic edge
modes in the ZZ terminations. These various features illustrate the
potentialities of engineering edge structures in layered materials
for application in electronics and optoelectronics.[21,22]An important property that characterizes these edge structures
is their intrinsic strain. In the case of graphene, it has been predicted
that edges structures can be found under either compression or tension,
depending on the specific type of edge structures.[12,13] However, most of these studies are limited to density functional
theory (DFT) calculations. Therefore, there is an urgency to carry
out an experimental program to validate these theoretical expectations.
Moreover, although strain is a well-understood mechanism from the
theoretical point of view, the experimental quantification of its
effects in edge structures in MoS2 has never been performed
so far,[23] and thus its impact remains largely
unexplored. Bridging this gap is therefore one of the main motivations
of this work.Here, we combine aberration-corrected transmission
electron microscopy
(TEM) with the geometrical-phase analysis (GPA) method to quantify
the local strain field relaxation map in MoS2 layers. Our
results reveal that the two-dominant edge structures, AC and ZZ, induce
the formation of different amounts of localized strain fields. The
resulting improved knowledge about the edge morphology and properties
in MoS2 can in turn provide novel avenues (for instance,
to tailor the carrier type and catalytic activity of layered materials),
providing important input for the next generation of optoelectronic
devices built upon them.First of all, the crystalline nature
of the MoS2 flakes
is determined by means of aberration-corrected high-angle annular
dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy (AC HAADF-STEM)
characterization. For these studies, MoS2 flakes are mechanically
exfoliated and subsequently transferred to a TEM grid. For further
details, see section I of the Supporting Information. Figure a displays
a AC-STEM image of a representative MoS2 flake, obtained
by operating the microscope at 200 kV. The characteristic hexagonal
honeycomb atomic arrangement of [0001]-oriented MoS2 flake
is clearly resolved. Together with the corresponding HAADF intensity
profile (Figure b),
which is directly related to the averaged atomic number and the thickness
of the sample;[24] this confirms the hexagonal
2H crystalline phase of MoS2. Note that here the HAADF
intensity profile has been taken along the armchair (AC) direction
(red rectangle in Figure a). For [0001]-oriented MoS2 (Figure d), at the S-site, the electron
beam interacts with a S atom first, while at the Mo site, the Mo atom
is contacted first (Figure e). The fact that there are no variations in the relative
intensities between the Mo-sites and S-sites indicates that in this
specific region we have an even number of MoS2 layers.
The lattice parameter of MoS2 can be then determined by
measuring the Mo–Mo bond length, which can be measured from
the HAADF intensity profile (Figure c) taken along the zigzag (ZZ) edge bond direction
(green rectangle in Figure a). The length of the Mo–Mo edge turns out to be 0.317
nm, which corresponds to the equilibrium lattice parameter of MoS2 with hexagonal crystal structure.[25] This result indicates that the MoS2 lattice is not perturbed
in this region. Moreover, the absence of holes[26] and folds[27] formation during
the measurements, which could compromise our results, ensures that
the quality of the MoS2 flakes is maintained when operating
the microscope at 200 kV, as has been previously reported.[28,29]
Figure 1
(a)
Atomic-resolution STEM image of [0001]-oriented MoS2 flake.
(b, c) HAADF intensity profile taken along the AC and ZZ
directions red and green rectangles in panel a, respectively. (d,
e) Schematic atomic model of in-plane and out-of-plane of 2H MoS2, respectively. In panel d, the AC and ZZ directions have
been indicated by red and green dashed arrows, respectively.
(a)
Atomic-resolution STEM image of [0001]-oriented MoS2 flake.
(b, c) HAADF intensity profile taken along the AC and ZZ
directions red and green rectangles in panel a, respectively. (d,
e) Schematic atomic model of in-plane and out-of-plane of 2HMoS2, respectively. In panel d, the AC and ZZ directions have
been indicated by red and green dashed arrows, respectively.
Strain-Dependent Edge Structure in a MoS2 Flake
Figure a displays
a AC HAADF-STEM image taken in the region around the transition from
three to two MLs in the [0001]-oriented MoS2 flake. The
difference in contrast separates the 3MLs (brighter) and 2MLs (darker)
regions (details on the thickness measurements can be found in section SI–IV). To map the strain field
around the edges of MoS2, the GPA method has been applied.[30] The basic idea of the GPA technique is to measure
local phase distortions, which can be directly linked to any distortion
in the lattice fringes in the atomic-resolution HAADF image with respect
to a reference. The corresponding strain fields can be then calculated
by tacking the derivative of the displacement field.[31,32] In this analysis, the scan distortions introduced during the STEM
data acquisition have been corrected (see sections SI and SII for further details about this procedure). The phase
image (Figure d) was
calculated for the set of (01–10) lattice fringes (Figure c), evaluated from
the fast Fourier transform (FFT); see Figure b. The phase image exhibits a discontinuity
from 0 to around the transition
from 3MLs to 2MLs.
Taking the x–axis parallel to [−12–10], the corresponding
strain field is shown in Figure e.
Figure 2
(a, b) Atomic-resolution HAADF image taken in the transition
region
between 3MLs and 2MLs and
the corresponding fast Fourier transform (FFT), respectively. (c)
(01–10) lattice fringes obtained by filtering. (d) Phase image
of (01–10) lattice fringes, where the yellow rectangle indicates
the reference region used for the strain field map calculation. The
color range indicates variations from −π to π.
(e) The ε strain component indicating
the presence of strong tensile strain in this transition region. (f)
Atomic model representing the structure of the ZZ and AC edge structures
in MoS2.
(a, b) Atomic-resolution HAADF image taken in the transition
region
between 3MLs and 2MLs and
the corresponding fast Fourier transform (FFT), respectively. (c)
(01–10) lattice fringes obtained by filtering. (d) Phase image
of (01–10) lattice fringes, where the yellow rectangle indicates
the reference region used for the strain field map calculation. The
color range indicates variations from −π to π.
(e) The ε strain component indicating
the presence of strong tensile strain in this transition region. (f)
Atomic model representing the structure of the ZZ and AC edge structures
in MoS2.Crucially, from the strain
field map (Figure e) we observe a region exhibiting tensile
strain, whose value ranges between 2% and 4%, localized exactly at
the transition between the regions with 2MLs and with 3MLs. More specifically,
such transition region is defined by the intersections of the family
of planes {1100} and {1–210}. The atomic terminations of these
two families of planes are known as zigzag (ZZ) and armchair (AC)
configurations, respectively, and are represented in Figure f. Note that when two ZZ edges
merge, the resulting junction defines the minimal unit of an AC edge.
We find that the ZZ edges exhibit tensile strain ranging between (2
± 0.5) % and (4 ± 1) %, where the later value arises at
the junctions between two ZZ edges (that represents a short AC edge).
However, the longer AC edge (labeled as γ) appears under a tensile
strain of around (2 ± 0.5) %. The corresponding strain profiles
are shown in Figure SI-4 and section SI–IV. Note that here, we use
a Fourier mask that leads to a spatial resolution of 0.5 nm. This
choice represents an appropriate balance between smoother strain fields
but worse spatial resolution (achieved with a small mask) and better
spatial resolution but with a higher level of fluctuation. See section SI–III for further details about
the interplay between spatial resolution and signal-to-noise ratio.The appearance of such localized strain at the ZZ and AC edges
could be related to the edge relaxation mechanism itself, induced
by the adjustment of the bond length and bond angles of the edge atoms.[33] In this scenario, the MoS2 sheets
generated by mechanical exfoliation initially have an excess of energy.
Therefore, the free-edges (S–Mo–S) of the MoS2 flakes are originated with stress. Subsequently, the MoS2 sheet relaxes to reduce this excess of energy. Theoretical calculations
of the elastic properties of phosphorene nanoribbons[34] reported a similar result, where the energy relaxation
modifies the atomic arrangement of AC and ZZ edges, resulting into
a tensile stress along the ZZ and AC edges consistent with our findings
here. Moreover, we also found that this relaxation mechanism is translated
into an out-of-plane distortion[35] (see sections SI–III for further details).
EELS
Characterization of Electronic Properties of MoS2 Flakes
To obtain further insight on the effects of edge
strain on the resulting electronic behavior, we have carried out a
direct correlation experiment by means of an electron energy loss
spectroscopy (EELS) analysis.[36] A monochromated
electron source operating at 60 kV, which achieves an energy resolution
of around 30 meV, was used for these measurements. A crucial advantage
of EELS is that it allows achieving high-energy resolution while simultaneously
leading to competitive spatial resolution.[37]Figure a displays
a low-magnification HAADF-STEM image taken in the same region where
the strain measurements were performed (see Figure a). Subsequently, point-by-point EELS spectra
were recorded at different locations in the boundary region between 2MLs and 3MLs, indicated by the
points S1 to S4 in Figure a. We focused on the low-loss energy region, ranging between
electron energy losses of 0 and 4 eV. The most-distinctive features
of the EELS spectra (Figure b) are the presence of two relatively narrow peaks, located
at around 1.89 eV (peak A) and 2.05 eV (peak B), respectively. These
two peaks in the MoS2 EELS spectra can be interpreted as
arising from the direct exciton transitions, specially due to band
splitting effects induced to interlayer interaction and spin–orbit
coupling.[9,38,39] Our measurements
for the position of these peaks are consistent with previously experimental[40] and theoretical studies.[41] We further quantify the properties of these exciton peaks
by means of a fitting procedure, in which a double Gaussian is used
for the signal, combined with a quadratic polynomial for the background.
The comparison between the EELS measurements and the resulting fits
is shown in Figures c–f, where we also show the two Gaussian peaks, denoted by
peak A and peak B, with the background subtracted.
Figure 3
(a) Low-magnification
HAADF–STEM image of the MoS2 flake in the transition
region between 2 and 3 ML. (b) Offset of
the EELS spectra corresponding to S1, S2, S3, and S4 in panel a. (c–f)
EELS spectra recorded at S1, S2, S3, and S4 with the corresponding
fits.
(a) Low-magnification
HAADF–STEM image of the MoS2 flake in the transition
region between 2 and 3 ML. (b) Offset of
the EELS spectra corresponding to S1, S2, S3, and S4 in panel a. (c–f)
EELS spectra recorded at S1, S2, S3, and S4 with the corresponding
fits.One factor that is known to affect
the peaks’ width is the
thickness of the MoS2 layers.[40] Moreover, it is conceivable that the strain localized at the interface
(see Figure e) might
also induce variations in these widths. To investigate the interplay
between these two effects, we have recorded EELS spectra at two additional
locations (see Figure SI-6 in sections SI–VII), labeled by T1 (in 2
MLs region) and T2 (in 3 MLs region) in Figure a. Because these EELS spectra correspond
to regions far from the boundaries, no effects associated with edge
strain are expected to arise.By comparing the peak A (and B)
fwhm value between points T1 and
T2, we find that it increases by around 70% (and 30%, respectively);
see sections SI–VII. However, when
comparing the fwhm values of peak A (B) between the points S1 and
S3 (see Figure ) (that
is, just before and after crossing the interface where, in addition
to the different thicknesses, we must also account for the possible
effects of strain), we find that the increase is now around 30% (15%).
Therefore, we observe a nontrivial dependence of the fwhm values of
the two exciton peaks at the interface region, which cannot be accounted
purely by the change in thickness and, at least partly, should be
understood in terms of the interface strain. This remarkable correlation
highlights the deep connection between structural and electronic properties
of MoS2, which can be tuned layer by layer. In this respect,
new theoretical calculations would be required to fully disentangle
the contribution of the various physical mechanisms that contribute
to the exciton peak broadening, especially the interplay between the
tensile strain at the edge and the layer thickness variation.
Figure 4
Variation of
the fwhm of peaks A and B along this transition region,
where measurements corresponding to the points labeled as S1 to S4
in Figure a are shown.
Variation of
the fwhm of peaks A and B along this transition region,
where measurements corresponding to the points labeled as S1 to S4
in Figure a are shown.Concerning the peak positions
as determined from the fit, we find
values of 1.89 and 1.88 eV for peak A and 2.05 and 2.08 eV for peak
B in the regions with two and three MLs, respectively. We therefore
find that for peak B there is a clear difference in peak position
between the two regions. This behavior could be understood as a direct
consequence of the specific crystalline structure of MoS2. Indeed, for an odd number of MoS2 layers, the crystal
belongs to the noncentrosymmetric D3h space group. However,
for an even number of layers instead, the crystal belongs to the D3d space group, which is characterized by inversion symmetry.
Strain
Dependence of Free-Edge Curvature
Strain-dependent
edge structures also arise at the interface between the MoS2 flake and the vacuum, the so-called free edges. Figure illustrates a AC HAADF-STEM
image taken in a region that only exhibits ZZ edge terminations. Moreover,
as can be seen in the filtered lattice fringes image (Figure b), this free edge alternates
concave and convex regions. These opposite-curvature regions are originated
during the mechanical exfoliation process. By following the same procedure
described before, the resulting strain field map allows us to distinguish
regions with alternating localized compressive and tensile strain
at the ZZ edges. In particular, the concave regions exhibit a compressive
strain, while for the convex ones, a tensile strain is exhibited.
Moreover, as compared to the strain values reported at the interface
between 2MLs and 3MLs (see Figure e), here the levels
of strain reached are higher, with values up to around +30% in the
convex regions and down to around −14% in the concave regions.
These results suggest that the possibility of exploiting the free
edge curvature to turn tensile into compressive strain could provide
a novel handle to tune the electronic properties of layered materials.
Figure 5
(a) AC HAADF–STEM image of a region exhibiting
a free edge of MoS2. (b) From the filtered lattice fringes,
we can clearly identify concave and convex terminations. (c) The ε strain component indicating the presence
of compressive (tensile) strain in the concave (convex) region.
(a) AC HAADF–STEM image of a region exhibiting
a free edge of MoS2. (b) From the filtered lattice fringes,
we can clearly identify concave and convex terminations. (c) The ε strain component indicating the presence
of compressive (tensile) strain in the concave (convex) region.To summarize, controlling and
understanding the formation of localized
strain at the edge structures of TMD materials is of great importance
toward the customization of their electronic properties. Here, by
combining aberration-corrected TEM with the geometrical phase analysis
method, we have quantified the edge structures and elastic properties
of MoS2 flakes. We find that the relaxation of the ZZ and
AC edge structures leads to the appearance of a tensile strain, with
magnitude ranging between 2% and 4%. This implies that the tensile
strain can lead to the elastic distortion of the edge. Moreover, the
EELS analysis performed at the same transition region highlights an
increase of the exciton A and B peak widths by around 30% and 15%,
respectively, that can at least partly be explained by the presence
of such tensile strain at the edges. However, this broadening of the
exciton peaks also receives contributions from the change of thickness
of the MoS2 layers. In this respect, new theoretical calculations
would be required to fully disentangle the contribution of the various
physical mechanisms that contribute to the exciton peak broadening,
especially the interplay between the tensile strain at the edge and
the layer thickness variation. Finally, strain measurements performed
at free edges between MoS2 and a vacuum, which exhibit
convex and concave regions, demonstrate the direct interplay between
interface curvature and the presence of either tensile or compressive
strain. Even if here we have restricted ourselves to the analysis
of MoS2 flakes, our approach is fully general, and we plan
to extend it to a comprehensive analysis of the strain-dependent edge
structures in other layered materials. Our results could therefore
pave the way toward the customization of electronic properties of
TMD materials by means of strain-dependent edge structure.
Authors: Sònia Conesa-Boj; Francesca Boioli; Eleonora Russo-Averchi; Sylvain Dunand; Martin Heiss; Daniel Rüffer; Nicolas Wyrsch; Christophe Ballif; Leo Miglio; Anna Fontcuberta i Morral Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Mark A Lukowski; Andrew S Daniel; Fei Meng; Audrey Forticaux; Linsen Li; Song Jin Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2013-07-03 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Hiram J Conley; Bin Wang; Jed I Ziegler; Richard F Haglund; Sokrates T Pantelides; Kirill I Bolotin Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2013-07-09 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Abhishek Parija; Yun-Hyuk Choi; Zhuotong Liu; Justin L Andrews; Luis R De Jesus; Sirine C Fakra; Mohammed Al-Hashimi; James D Batteas; David Prendergast; Sarbajit Banerjee Journal: ACS Cent Sci Date: 2018-04-03 Impact factor: 14.553