Metastable single crystals of nonstoichiometric Pb1-xTe are obtained by rapid cooling from the melt. The composition and crystallographic morphology are studied using X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and electron backscatter diffraction. Most single crystals have cubic, pyramidal, or hemispherical shapes with sizes ranging from 50 to 400 μm. All crystals adopt the same face-centered cubic rock salt structure, and the crystal growth direction is ⟨100⟩. The bulk part of the rapidly cooled material solidifies in the form of a Te-rich polycrystalline material in which grains are separated by the PbTe-Te eutectic phase. The stabilization of nonstoichiometric Pb1-xTe provides further scope for the optimization of lead telluride-based thermoelectric materials.
Metastable single crystals of nonstoichiometric Pb1-xTe are obtained by rapid cooling from the melt. The composition and crystallographic morphology are studied using X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and electron backscatter diffraction. Most single crystals have cubic, pyramidal, or hemispherical shapes with sizes ranging from 50 to 400 μm. All crystals adopt the same face-centered cubic rock salt structure, and the crystal growth direction is ⟨100⟩. The bulk part of the rapidly cooled material solidifies in the form of a Te-rich polycrystalline material in which grains are separated by the PbTe-Teeutectic phase. The stabilization of nonstoichiometric Pb1-xTe provides further scope for the optimization of lead telluride-based thermoelectric materials.
Entities:
Keywords:
electron backscatter diffraction; lead telluride; nanostructures; single crystals; thermoelectrics
Lead telluride (PbTe) has attracted much attention since the 1950s
due to its unique physicochemical properties. After more than 60 years,
PbTe still has value for exploration and research, giving inspiration
not only with respect to application and performance but also regarding
its structure and morphology. As part of the family of IV–VI
narrow-band-gap semiconductors, it has found use mainly as a thermoelectric
material for power generation in the 500–800 K range[1−3] and also in infrared detectors and tunable diode lasers.[4] Concerning thermoelectric applications, modifications
to PbTe are still leading to improvements in its performance. For
example, Biswas et al. incorporated SrTe nanoparticles in p-type Na-doped
PbTe to achieve a figure of merit (ZT) of 2.2,[5] and more recently, Wu et al. achieved a ZT of 2.5 by alloying Na-doped PbTe with EuTe and CdTe.[6] Efforts have also been made to enhance the performance
of n-type PbTe, for example, by Sb-doping.[7] You et al. recently showed that the so-called dynamic doping, involving
the introduction of Cu atoms on the interstitial sites of PbTe, can
also enhance ZT.[8] Concurrently,
detailed attempts to control the chemical synthesis of doped PbTe
have been reported,[9] and progress has been
made toward its incorporation in working modules.[10] An alternative approach involves complex nanostructuring;
for example, Xiang et al. created composites of pristine PbTe nanoparticles
combined with C- and Ag-coated PbTe nanoparticles in order to control
both the electron and phonon transport.[11] There is also a great deal of interest in the growth of anisotropic
PbTe nanostructures. The most widely used approaches are wet chemical
methods,[12] electrodeposition methods,[13] sonochemical approaches,[14] and thin-film growth.[15] Various
types of nanostructures have been reported, including nanorods,[16] nanotubes,[17] nanocubes,[18] nanowires,[19−21] quantum dots,[22] and nanoboxes.[23]Thus far, it has generally been assumed that PbTe is stoichiometric.
According to the Pb–Te equilibrium binary phase diagram,[24] when the atomic ratio of Te in the liquid phase
is more than 50%, stoichiometric PbTe will be continuously precipitated
when the temperature is decreased slowly below the liquidus line.
When the temperature is lowered further below the eutectic temperature
of 410 °C, a eutectic of two phases (PbTe and Te) solidifies
from the rest of the liquid phase. However, a study by Glazov and
Poyarkov[25] addressed the possibility of
stabilizing nonstoichiometric Pb1–Te by rapid quenching from the melt. It was argued that at Te concentrations
of >50 at. %, fast quenching can give rise to diffusionless solidification,
which allows nonstoichiometric compositions to be obtained at room
temperature. Although adjusting the stoichiometry might provide a
new route toward tuning the properties of PbTe, this possibility has
to the best of our knowledge not been investigated further.In this work, we show that nonstoichiometric Pb1–Te single crystals of several different morphologies
as well as polycrystalline materials can be obtained by rapid cooling
of the Pb–Temelt in vacuum. In order to understand the relationship
between the morphology and composition of these products, we study
them separately using single-crystal X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) equipped with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy
(EDS), and electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD). According to our
knowledge, EBSD is used here for the first time to align the macroscopic
crystal shape with its crystallographic orientation.
Experimental Section
Crystal
Synthesis
The Pb1–Te
samples were prepared by fast quenching from the
melt. Elemental Pb powder (∼5 μm, Alfa Aesar) and Te
shot (∼5 mm, Alfa Aesar) of 99.99% purity (total mass ∼5
g) with the molar ratio 1:1 were mixed for 15 min using an agate mortar
and pestle, flame-sealed in a quartz tube that was evacuated to 10–1 to 10–2 mbar, and then heated over
3 h to 1000 °C. At this temperature, the mixture is in the liquid
phase,[24] where it was held for 3 h before
quenching by removing the quartz tube from the furnace and immediately
dropping it into 20 L of room-temperature water. A large number of
single crystals (100–300 μm in size) were obtained together
with a larger volume of polycrystalline bulk material. An optical
microscope was used to collect the single crystals, which were both
attached to the bulk material and to the inner wall of the quartz
tube.
Characterization Methods
The structure
of the crystals was characterized by single-crystal XRD using a Bruker
D8 Venture diffractometer operating with Mo Kα radiation and
equipped with a Photon100 area detector and a Triumph monochromator.
Each single crystal was fixed on a 0.3 mm diameter nylon loop using
cryo-oil and maintained at a temperature of 100 K during the measurement
by a flow of dry nitrogen. Bruker APEX III software was used for data
processing and SHELX97 software was used to refine the crystal structure.[26] Powder XRD patterns were collected on the bulk
material using a Bruker D8 ADVANCE diffractometer with Cu Kα
radiation. The diffraction patterns were fitted using GSAS software.[27]The microstructure of both the single
crystals and bulk material was studied using SEM, EDS, and EBSD using
a FEI Nova NanoSEM 650 equipped with an EDAX EDS/EBSD system with
an Octane SDD EDS detector and Hikari Plus EBSD camera. Team v.4.5
and OIM Analysis v.8.1 software were used to perform semiquantitative
EDS and EBSD data analysis, respectively. The cubic structure of PbTe
with a lattice parameter of 0.64 nm and the set of main reflector
planes (200), (220), (222), (420), (422), and (442) were successfully
used to index all the obtained Kikuchi patterns and determine the
single-crystal orientation. The common electron beam acceleration
voltage for EDS and EBSD observations was selected as 25 kV, which
allows reliable semiquantitative EDS analysis on the basis of the
Lα peaks of both elements and also provides a reasonably
strong EBSD pattern for crystal orientation determination. Detailed
EDS measurements were performed at a lower acceleration voltage of
10–15 keV which corresponds to an EDS probing depth of 0.4–0.7
μm.The thermal diffusivity (α) of the bulk material
was measured
by the laser flash method in a Linseis LFA1000 apparatus. A sample
that was visually free of cracks and holes was cut from the bulk and
polished to a slice of 4.0 × 3.9 × 0.9 mm. Data were collected
on warming from room temperature to 400 °C with 25 °C steps.
The thermal conductivity (κ) was determined using the relation
κ = αρC, where ρ is the sample density and the specific heat capacity
(C) was calculated using
the Dulong–Petit approximation.
Results
and Discussion
Four kinds of samples were identified under
the optical microscope
and deemed worthy of the in-depth study: cubic-shaped single crystals,
prismatic-shaped single crystals, hemispherical-shaped single crystals,
and bulk polycrystalline material. The structure and morphology of
each sample type were studied separately, and their similarities and
differences are discussed below.
Crystal Structure Analysis
The morphologies
of the single crystals fall into two broad categories: one type has
well-defined facets and edges and includes cubes, triangular pyramids,
and asymmetrical prisms; the other type has the form of a hemispherical
droplet with one approximately flat face. Figure a–c shows the (hk0) reciprocal lattice planes reconstructed from raw single-crystal
XRD data for three representative single crystals with different morphologies
at 100 K. The crystals show slightly different lattice parameters
but are all close to the value of 6.438 Å reported for PbTe at
120 K.[28]Figure d shows the single-crystal XRD data at 300
K for the triangular pyramid. The data are consistent with space group Fm3̅m for all three crystals. In Figure b,c, the spots are
rather broad, especially at high angles, suggesting the presence of
multiple mosaic blocks. In Figure c, two faint polycrystalline rings are apparent near
the center of the reciprocal lattice plot, indexed as 200 and 220.
Nevertheless, the well-defined spots indicate that the major volume
fraction of the hemispherical sample is a cubic rock salt single crystal.
Figure 1
(hk0) reciprocal lattice planes reconstructed
from raw single-crystal XRD data at 100 K for the (a) triangular pyramid,
(b) asymmetrical prism, and (c) hemispherical droplet. (d) Single-crystal
XRD data at 300 K for the triangular pyramid. (e) Fitted powder XRD
pattern of the polycrystalline bulk material collected at room temperature: Rp = 6.64%, Rwp =
9.50%, and Rexp = 1.13%.
(hk0) reciprocal lattice planes reconstructed
from raw single-crystal XRD data at 100 K for the (a) triangular pyramid,
(b) asymmetrical prism, and (c) hemispherical droplet. (d) Single-crystal
XRD data at 300 K for the triangular pyramid. (e) Fitted powder XRD
pattern of the polycrystalline bulk material collected at room temperature: Rp = 6.64%, Rwp =
9.50%, and Rexp = 1.13%.The powder XRD pattern collected on the bulk material in Figure e reveals the presence
of Te in addition to the main PbTe phase. The lattice parameter of
the main PbTe phase is 6.4663(3) Å, which is slightly above the
range of 6.455–6.465 Å reported in various room-temperature
studies and listed in the Inorganic Crystal Structure Database. The
lattice parameter of the triangular pyramid determined at 300 K by
single-crystal XRD is 6.4664(4) Å, which agrees well with that
of the bulk sample.
Morphological Analysis
Pyramids and Prisms
The sizes of
the single crystals with a pyramidal and prismatic morphology are
between 50 and 400 μm. As shown in Figure , in each single crystal at least one right
angle between crystal faces can be observed, and in the prisms there
is another angle between 0 and 45°. In these SEM-BSE (backscattered
electron) images, a brighter contrast corresponds to a greater concentration
of heavier (Pb) atoms. In Figure a,c, the surfaces of the single crystals exhibit some
spots and ring-like features, while in Figure b,d, the surfaces of the single crystals
are compositionally homogeneous (the dark patches on the sample surface
in Figure b are shown
by EDS to be residual silicone-based oil that was used to transfer
the crystals; EDS spectra from these areas are almost identical to
those collected from neighboring (uncontaminated) regions except for
the presence of small carbon, silicon, and oxygen peaks). Pits are
visible in many of the surfaces and are likely formed by the Berg
effect,[29,30] where the concentration of liquid or vapor
is greater near the corners or edges of a growing crystal than at
the centers of the faces.
Figure 2
(a–d) SEM-BSE images of some pyramidal-
and prismatic-shaped
PbTe single crystals. (e,f) Secondary electron (SE) image (left, 71°
tilt), EBSD pattern (top right), and determined top-view crystal orientation
(bottom right) for the crystals shown in (a,c), respectively.
(a–d) SEM-BSE images of some pyramidal-
and prismatic-shaped
PbTe single crystals. (e,f) Secondary electron (SE) image (left, 71°
tilt), EBSD pattern (top right), and determined top-view crystal orientation
(bottom right) for the crystals shown in (a,c), respectively.In order to identify the crystallographic planes
associated with
individual faces of the single crystals, we used EBSD to determine
the orientation of each crystal lying on the flat aluminum (Al) substrate. Figure e,f demonstrates
such an observation for two single crystals when the substrate normal
is tilted 71° to the electron beam direction. Kikuchi patterns
(top right) were collected from a few surface points to prove that
they are single crystals, and their correct indexing results in three
Euler angles determining the crystal orientation in the sample coordinate
system.Axonometric projections of the cubic crystal orientations
(top
view) are shown in the lower right parts of the two figures. The agreement
between the ⟨001⟩ crystal axes in the axonometric projections
and the edges of the crystals in the SEM images proves that the crystal
faces are {001} planes, which was the case for every pyramidal- and
prismatic-shaped crystal investigated. Crystals of cubic morphology
usually grow in the ⟨100⟩ direction, which requires
lower energy.[31] Furthermore, planar growth
in the ⟨100⟩ direction is also observed in the form
of steps on the {100} facets, which are particularly obvious in pits
on these facets as apparent in Figure a,d.[32] The {100} planes
also seem to be cleavage planes (see Figure S1).The surfaces of pyramidal and prismatic single crystals
that exhibit
both light and dark contrast in the SEM-BSE images were further investigated
using EDS. The results for the two representative samples are summarized
in Figure . Figure a shows the BSE image
of one (001) facet of the pyramid from Figure a. EDS elemental maps of Pb and Te (collected
from the rectangular area marked on the BSE image) clearly indicate
the presence of two types of domains, in agreement with the BSE image;
the brighter areas represent lead-rich areas, and the darker spots
correspond to lead-deficient areas. The atomic Pb/Te ratio calculated
from the spectrum collected from the whole mapped area is 33:67. The
average atomic ratios of Pb to Te determined from many points in the
main phase (bright) region and lead-deficient (dark) regions are 41:59
and 17:83, respectively. Thus, the entire area is Te-rich with respect
to the nominal 1:1 stoichiometry, and the dark spots and ring-like
features on the (001) surfaces of the single crystals are even more
Te-rich. EDS analysis performed on the surface of the single crystal
in Figure b with a
uniform contrast yielded a Pb to Te atomic ratio of 43:57 (Figure b), which is similar
to the composition of the main phase in Figure a. The areas of dark contrast in Figure b are due to surface
contamination by the oil used for crystal manipulation. The otherwise
uniform contrast implies that all faces show a homogeneous composition.
Figure 3
SEM-BSE
images of (a) one surface of the pyramidal single crystal
shown in Figure a
and (b) two faces of the prismatic crystal shown in Figure b. The rectangles on the SEM
images indicate areas over which EDS spectra were measured; the corresponding
compositions (at. %) of Te and Pb are shown in the tables.
SEM-BSE
images of (a) one surface of the pyramidal single crystal
shown in Figure a
and (b) two faces of the prismatic crystal shown in Figure b. The rectangles on the SEM
images indicate areas over which EDS spectra were measured; the corresponding
compositions (at. %) of Te and Pb are shown in the tables.The above cases are representative of more than a dozen faceted
single-crystal samples that were studied; that is, sometimes the sample
surface is homogeneous and sometimes Te-rich spots and rings appear.
We propose that these crystals grow directly from the vapor phase
due to the rapid cooling rate, as shown schematically in Figure . Nucleation (step
1) occurs on a relatively flat surface (the inner wall of the quartz
tube or the surface of the material that has already solidified) and
growth then occurs along the {100} planes (step 2). Step 3 shows two
different situations during the final growth phase in which the vapor
has almost all condensed. Due to the lower melting point of Pb compared
to that of Te, we suspect that some of the Pb vapor present during
growth will either react with residual water vapor in the quartz tube
or condense on the inner wall of the tube, both of which lower the
partial vapor pressure of Pb and cause Te enrichment in the synthetic
environment. This will in turn produce the observed 2–5 μm
Te-rich spots as well as Te-rich dendrites on the (100) surface. Other
areas will not be exposed to excess Te vapor at the crystal surface,
and the resulting (100) plane will be homogeneous in composition.
Figure 4
Schematic
diagram of single-crystal growth on the flat quartz tube
wall. The SEM images show Te-rich spots and dendrites on a crystal
surface.
Schematic
diagram of single-crystal growth on the flat quartz tube
wall. The SEM images show Te-rich spots and dendrites on a crystal
surface.The Pb-deficiency of these single
crystals (as compared to the
equimolar starting composition) can also be explained by the Te-rich
growth environment. There are only a small number of reports suggesting
that PbTe can be stabilized in a nonstoichiometric form, which is
unexpected based on the Pb–Te binary phase diagram.[24] In the work of Ovsyannikov et al.,[33] the crystal structures of polycrystalline samples
with compositions Pb0.45Te0.55 and Pb0.55Te0.45 were studied at high pressure, but no chemical
analysis was presented nor were details of how these phases formed.
Bauer Pereira et al.[34] also performed water
quenching of PbTe from the melt and obtained a sample of composition
Pb0.94Te with a lattice parameter of 6.461(3) Å at
room temperature, slightly smaller than our sample, but did not study
the growth process or morphological characteristics. To the best of
our knowledge, the most detailed study of nonstoichiometric Pb1–Te remains that of Glazov and Poyarkov,[25] which suggests that the composition can be tuned
over a relatively wide range on the Te-rich side of the phase diagram
while retaining the cubic rock salt structure. It was reported that
quenching must be performed from 1000 °C to obtain the nonstoichiometric
cubic phase; quenching from 800 °C gave a mixture of PbTe and
Te (the latter phase possibly containing a little Pb). The room-temperature
lattice parameter of the cubic phase was reported as 6.465 Å
at 74 at. % Te (similar to our value for the bulk material) and rapidly
increased at higher Te concentrations. It was suggested that the faster
the cooling rate, the wider the composition range that can be stabilized
at room temperature.
Droplet-Shaped Crystals
An example
of a hemispherical crystal and its microstructural characterization
is shown in Figure . Figure a shows
a full view of a hemispherical crystal. A complex microstructure is
formed on its flat surface, as seen in Figure b,b1. Primary dendrites with light contrast,
partially decomposed into two phases (see detail in Figure b1), are surrounded by a matrix
that itself consists of very fine lamellae with light contrast dispersed
in a dark (Te-rich) surrounding. The overall sample composition (Pb/Te
atomic ratio) calculated from the elemental map in Figure d is 18:82; in the primary
dendrite region (the large bright areas in Figure b,b1), the ratio is 40:60, and in the Te-rich
region, it is 7:93 (very close to the eutectic composition of 89.1
at. % Te[21]). A BSE image from the spherical
surface (Figure c)
shows a different volume ratio between the primary dendrites and the
interdendritic phase than the flat surface in Figure b due to two main reasons: (i) the dendrites
do not look to be decomposed and (ii) the interdendritic phase is
sunk down below the surface. Accurate EDS measurements cannot be obtained
from a surface that is not flat; thus, the composition of the spherical
surface could not be quantitatively determined.
Figure 5
SEM-BSE images of the
(a) hemispherical crystal; (b) and (b1) details
from the flat surface; (c) details from the spherical surface; and
(d,e) corresponding EDS elemental maps from images (b,c), respectively.
SEM-BSE images of the
(a) hemispherical crystal; (b) and (b1) details
from the flat surface; (c) details from the spherical surface; and
(d,e) corresponding EDS elemental maps from images (b,c), respectively.These microstructural observations suggest a scenario
involving
the rapid solidification of liquid droplets sitting on a cooled solid
surface, probably the wall of the quartz tube. According to the equilibrium
binary phase diagram,[24] when a melt with
a Pb/Te composition of 18:82 is cooled, it will first form a gradually
growing primary PbTe phase (50:50 at. %) in a liquid with a gradually
increasing amount of Te. At the eutectic temperature of ∼410
°C, this liquid phase reaches the eutectic composition and solidifies
as the eutectic phase. However, the cooling rate of our samples was
relatively high; therefore, the formation of metastable phases can
be expected. The primary phase will not be PbTe but a metastable phase
with an excess amount of Te because diffusion is not able to remove
all the excess Te atoms trapped in the solidified primary phase. Due
to fast cooling and limited diffusion, this primary phase forms a
dendritic structure with the liquid phase remaining between the dendrites.
This liquid will solidify as a fine eutectic between the primary dendrites.
The primary dendrites supersaturated by Te will then partially disintegrate,
forming another fine eutectic in the microstructure. All the above-mentioned
microstructural features are directly visible in Figure b,b1.Similar to the
prismatic crystals, the atomic ratio of Pb to Te
in the primary dendrites of both the hemispherical flat surface and
the curved surface is approximately 2:3. This fact suggests that similar
cooling rates were involved during the vapor-phase growth of the prismatic
single crystals and during solidification of the melt droplets, allowing
a similar degree of supersaturation of Te atoms into the PbTe single
crystal.Figure shows an
EBSD microstructural characterization of a large area of the flat
surface of the hemispherical sample. Figure a is an image quality map clearly showing
the size and distribution of the primary phase dendrites and the Te-rich
pseudoeutectic matrix giving patterns of similar quality. The corresponding
inverse pole figure map in Figure b was obtained by indexing the EBSD patterns collected
while scanning the whole area assuming the presence of the same cubic
phase. The grain orientation of the entire crystal is essentially
the same with one ⟨001⟩ direction almost parallel to
the flat surface normal. The local variation of the crystal orientation
is visualized in Figure c where the average grain orientation angle deviating from the crystal
orientation at the scan center is shown. In the entire area, all pixels
show a deviation from one direction of less than 10°. This implies
that (i) the whole crystal grows as a single dendrite, and individual
dendrite arms may gather a misorientation with increasing distance
from the origin of nucleation and (ii) subsequent solidification of
the eutectic phase also forms a cubic crystalline structure growing
epitaxially on the adjacent dendrite. Although three different solid
phases (primary Pb1–Te and Te-rich
eutectic) are present in the hemispheric droplet, the whole droplet
can be considered as a single cubic crystal with mutual misorientations
of blocks smaller than 10°.
Figure 6
EBSD mapping from a 40 × 50 μm2 area on the
flat surface of the hemispherical sample shown in Figure a. (a) Image quality map quantifying
the contrast of EBSD patterns collected from individual pixels; (b)
[001] inverse pole figure map taken from the same area showing nearly
the same crystal direction throughout the area probed: [001] is almost
parallel to the sample surface normal with the (001) pole figure inset
showing an almost uniform crystal orientation; (c) grain reference
orientation deviation angle map demonstrating how the local misorientation
between individual dendrites develops. White areas on the maps indicate
pixels with bad quality and therefore unindexed Kikuchi patterns.
EBSD mapping from a 40 × 50 μm2 area on the
flat surface of the hemispherical sample shown in Figure a. (a) Image quality map quantifying
the contrast of EBSD patterns collected from individual pixels; (b)
[001] inverse pole figure map taken from the same area showing nearly
the same crystal direction throughout the area probed: [001] is almost
parallel to the sample surface normal with the (001) pole figure inset
showing an almost uniform crystal orientation; (c) grain reference
orientation deviation angle map demonstrating how the local misorientation
between individual dendrites develops. White areas on the maps indicate
pixels with bad quality and therefore unindexed Kikuchi patterns.The curved surface of the droplet is not ideally
spherical but
shows some traces (marked by arrows) of preferential growth direction
as the SE image in Figure a demonstrates. The fact that these traces can be associated
with the traces of crystallographic planes (as shown in Figure e for the {111} planes) is
additional confirmation that the whole droplet comprises one single
cubic crystal as shown by single-crystal XRD. The growth of the nucleus
in the droplet also follows the growth direction of the cubic crystal.
Figure 7
(a) SEM
top view of the hemispherical crystal with clear “meridian”
lines on the spherical surface. (b) EBSD pattern, (c) properly indexed
EBSD pattern, and (d) (100) pole figure. (e) Traces of {111} planes
agreeing with main meridian lines.
(a) SEM
top view of the hemispherical crystal with clear “meridian”
lines on the spherical surface. (b) EBSD pattern, (c) properly indexed
EBSD pattern, and (d) (100) pole figure. (e) Traces of {111} planes
agreeing with main meridian lines.
Polycrystalline Bulk
Figure summarizes the microstructural
characterization of a polished cross section of the polycrystalline
bulk material. Figure a is a forward-scattered electron (FSE) image from a large area of
333 × 784 μm2. A typicalpolycrystalline structure
containing primary grains of size 100–300 μm in diameter
with the eutectic phase between them is clearly present. EDS analysis
performed on the large area shows that the average composition of
the bulk sample has a Pb/Te ratio of 39:61 at. %. Figure b,c shows EDS elemental distribution
maps, indicating different elemental compositions in the primary grains
and eutectic. Local EDS mapping inside the primary grains and eutectic
regions confirms that they have the same (within experimental error)
elemental composition ratios of 45:55 and 8:92 at. %, respectively. Figure d shows a crystal
orientation map based on high-quality Kikuchi patterns obtained from
more than 1.2 million points inside the selected area. Pole figures
(not presented here) do not show any preferential crystallographic
orientation of the primary grains. The crystal orientation inside
the eutectic phase does not always agree with the orientation of the
adjacent primary grains, which indicates that the nucleation of the
eutectic phase probably occurs on a primary grain at a longer distance.
Figure 8
EDS and
EBSD mapping of 333 × 784 μm2 area
on the flat surface of a polished bulk sample. (a) FSE image and (b)
Pb and (c) Te elemental maps. (d) [001] Inverse pole figure map taken
from the same area showing the crystal direction parallel to the sample
surface normal. Crystal orientations of individual primary grains
are visualized by the axonometric cubic crystal insets.
EDS and
EBSD mapping of 333 × 784 μm2 area
on the flat surface of a polished bulk sample. (a) FSE image and (b)
Pb and (c) Te elemental maps. (d) [001] Inverse pole figure map taken
from the same area showing the crystal direction parallel to the sample
surface normal. Crystal orientations of individual primary grains
are visualized by the axonometric cubic crystal insets.Annealing was used to verify the stability of the Pb1–Te phase. We placed hemispherical
samples in vacuum
at 350 °C for 36 h, which is a typical operating temperature
of PbTe-based thermoelectric materials. The microstructure and elemental
maps of the annealed hemispherical sample are shown in Figure S2. The sample retained the dendrites
on the flat surface with a Pb/Te ratio of 40:60 at. %, which are separated
by the eutectic phase. The sample maintains the same Pb/Te atomic
ratio of approximately 2:3 (typical error ±3.5%). This is consistent
with the binary phase diagram,[24] where
the eutectic phase is formed on cooling below 410 °C; thus, when
the sample is annealed below the eutectic point, the sample is not
decomposed into stoichiometric PbTe and pure Te. Therefore, we conclude
that the Pb1–Te composition with
∼60 at. % Te is stable below 410° C.A block was
cut from the bulk material and the surfaces were polished
for the thermal conductivity measurement, as shown in Figure . The thermal conductivity
(∼0.9 W/m K above 100 °C) is significantly lower than
reported for pure, stoichiometric polycrystalline PbTe (a minimum
of ∼1.2 W/m K at ∼300 °C[8]). This is consistent with the presence of the eutectic phase at
the grain boundaries (Figure ), which induces additional phonon scattering.
Figure 9
Thermal conductivity
of the Pb1–Te bulk material.
Thermal conductivity
of the Pb1–Te bulk material.The other members of the IV–VI telluride
series, SnTe and
GeTe, always form with cation vacancies.[34,35] This leads to a high carrier concentration and electrical conductivity,
modest Seebeck coefficient, and high thermal conductivity. Therefore,
doping is needed to suppress the carrier concentration in order to
obtain optimal thermoelectric properties. Stoichiometric PbTe is different
in that doping is required to increase the carrier concentration to
its optimal value for thermoelectric applications. Our demonstration
that stable Pb1–Te can be obtained
by rapid quenching opens the possibility of optimizing the electrical
conductivity and Seebeck coefficient without the need for a dopant,
thus adding cooling rate to the parameters available for tuning the
thermoelectric properties. The next step will be to study the thermoelectric
performance of nonstoichiometric Pb1–Te and also to investigate the possible effect of cooling rate
on the microstructure of bulk samples, which can strongly influence
the thermal conductivity.
Conclusions
Single-crystal and polycrystalline samples of nonstoichiometric
Pb1–Te have been obtained by rapid
quenching from the melt. All samples retain the face-centered cubic
rock salt structure of stoichiometric PbTe. The morphology of the
samples depends on local compositional and solidification conditions
inside the quartz tube during quenching. Small single crystals are
formed by solidification from the vapor phase and exhibit {100} facets,
often not ideally flat due to a variation of local supersaturation
via the Berg effect. Hemispherical single crystals and the bulk polycrystalline
material are formed by solidification of the liquid phase and contain
traces of the Te-rich eutectic phase. In all cases, the quenched materials
contain ∼60 at. % Te. We also show that EBSD is an effective
method to determine the crystallographic orientation of small crystals.
The stabilization of nonstoichiometric Pb1–Te provides another parameter, the Pb/Te ratio, that gives
further scope for the optimization of lead telluride-based thermoelectric
materials.
Authors: Xiaofeng Qiu; Yongbing Lou; Anna C S Samia; Anando Devadoss; James D Burgess; Smita Dayal; Clemens Burda Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2005-09-12 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Kanishka Biswas; Jiaqing He; Ivan D Blum; Chun-I Wu; Timothy P Hogan; David N Seidman; Vinayak P Dravid; Mercouri G Kanatzidis Journal: Nature Date: 2012-09-20 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Y Yang; S C Kung; D K Taggart; C Xiang; F Yang; M A Brown; A G Güell; T J Kruse; J C Hemminger; R M Penner Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2008-07-12 Impact factor: 11.189