interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

145
APPROVED: Oliver M. R. Chyan, Major Professor Guido Verbeck, Committee Member Justin Youngblood, Committee Member Rob Petros, Committee Member William E. Acree, Chair of the Department of Chemistry Mark Wardell, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate School INTERFACIAL CHARACTERIZATION OF CHEMICAL VAPOR DEPOSITION (CVD) GROWN GRAPHENE AND ELECTRODEPOSITED BISMUTH ON RUTHENIUM SURFACE Jafar Abdelghani, B.S., M.Sc. Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS May 2014

Upload: others

Post on 18-May-2022

6 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

APPROVED: Oliver M. R. Chyan, Major Professor Guido Verbeck, Committee Member Justin Youngblood, Committee Member Rob Petros, Committee Member William E. Acree, Chair of the Department of

Chemistry Mark Wardell, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate

School

INTERFACIAL CHARACTERIZATION OF CHEMICAL VAPOR DEPOSITION (CVD) GROWN

GRAPHENE AND ELECTRODEPOSITED BISMUTH ON RUTHENIUM SURFACE

Jafar Abdelghani, B.S., M.Sc.

Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

May 2014

Page 2: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Abdelghani, Jafar. Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition (CVD) grown

graphene and electrodeposited bismuth on ruthenium surface. Doctor of Philosophy

(Chemistry-Analytical Chemistry), May 2014, 130 pp., 1 table, 71 figures, 96 numbered

references.

Graphene receives enormous attention owing to its distinctive physical and chemical

prosperities. Growing and transferring graphene to different substrates have been investigated.

The graphene growing on the copper substrate has an advantage of low solubility of carbon on

the copper which allow us to grow mostly monolayer graphene. Graphene sheet of few

centimeters can be transferred to 300nm silicon oxide and quartz crystal pre-deposited with

metal like Cu and Ru. Characterization of the graphene has been done with Raman and contact

angle measurement and recently quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) has been employed.

The underpotential deposition (UPD) process of Bi on Ru metal surface is studied using

electrochemical quartz crystal microbalance (EQCM) and XPS techniques. Both Bi UPD and Bi

bulk deposition are clearly observed on Ru in 1mM Bi (NO3)3/0.5M H2SO4. Bi monolayer

coverage calculated from mass (MLMass) and from charge (MLCharge) were compared with respect

to the potential scanning rates, anions and ambient controls. EQCM results indicate that Bi UPD

on Ru is mostly scan rate independent but exhibits interesting difference at the slower scan. Bi

UPD monolayer coverage calculated from cathodic frequency change (ΔfCathodic) is significantly

smaller than the monolayer coverage derived from integrated charge under the cathodic Bi UPD

peak when scan rate is at least 5 mV/s. XPS is utilized to explore the detailed chemical

composition of the observed interfacial process of Bi UPD on Ru.

Page 3: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Copyright 2014

by

Jafar Abdelghani

ii

Page 4: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost I would like to thank God. You have given me the power to believe in

myself and pursue my dreams. I could never have done this without the faith

I have in you, the Almighty. I take immense pleasure to express my sincere and deep sense of

gratitude to my advisor Dr. Oliver M. R. Chyan for his guidance, help, encouragement, and

support. I learned a lot from his knowledge and his critique of this work which helped me to

overcome the obstacles and succeed in the tough challenges.

Many thanks to my committee members Dr. Guido Verbeck, Dr. Justin Youngblood, Dr.

Rob Petros, and Dr. Ben Jang (external member Texas A&M) who have importantly helped to

make my research more interesting and improve the content of this dissertation. Also, JD Fox

from Dr. Verbeck group for helping analyze some samples for me. For all my friends back home

who supported and helped me when I needed them. Also, to my first friend in USA Fuad Noor

who opens his home for me with a great hospitality.

Last but not least I would like to thank my family, my parenst, my sisters, and my

brothers for their encouragement and support. They have supported me finically all these years,

so they are the ones who have this success. For my lovely wife Mozinah Khreisat who joined me

in this journey to fulfill this dream and endure my tough times and took care of our daughters.

Special thanks for my aunt Aisha Al-Faqeeh and their family for her kindness and support in the

USA.

iii

Page 5: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION OF INSTRUMENTS .......................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Thin Film Deposition ..................................................................................................... 1

1.2.1 Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) Reactor for Graphene Growth ................ 1

1.2.2 Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), Sputtering Instrument .............................. 3

1.3 Electrochemistry ........................................................................................................... 5

1.3.1 Fundamentals of Electrochemistry ................................................................ 5

1.3.2 The Nature of Electrochemical System .......................................................... 6

1.3.3 Three Electrode System ................................................................................. 7

1.3.4 Open Circuit Potential (OCP) .......................................................................... 8

1.3.5 Cyclic Voltammetry (CV)................................................................................. 9

1.3.6 Electrochemical Quartz Crystal Microbalance (EQCM)................................ 10

1.3.7 Rotating Disk Electrode System (RED) and Rotating Ring Disk Electrode

System (RRDE) ....................................................................................................... 12

1.4 Surface Analysis Techniques ....................................................................................... 13

1.4.1 X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS) ..................................................... 14

1.4.2 Fourier Transform-Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy.......................................... 15

1.4.2.1 Attenuated Total Reflectance (ATR) .......................................................... 18

1.4.3 Raman Spectroscopy .................................................................................... 19

iv

Page 6: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.5 Surface Microscope ..................................................................................................... 24

1.5.1 Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) .................................................................. 24

1.5.2 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) .......................................................... 26

1.6 References ................................................................................................................... 28

CHAPTER 2: GRAPHENE ................................................................................................................ 31

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 31

2.2 Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) Procedure to Grow Graphene .............................. 32

2.2.1 Growth of Graphene on Copper Substrate .................................................. 36

2.3 Transfer of CVD Graphene........................................................................................... 37

2.3.1 The Procedure of Transferring Graphene Grown on Copper ....................... 39

2.3.2 The Procedure of Transferring Graphene Grown on Nickel ......................... 40

2.4 Characterization of Graphene on Different Substrates, Raman Spectroscopy, Water

Contact Angle Measurements, and QCM Frequency ....................................................... 41

2.4.1 Detection of Graphene Monolayers Using QCM ......................................... 44

2.4.2 Detection Graphene Using AFM .................................................................. 46

2.5 Graphene Plasma Hydrogenation (Graphane) and Characterization by FTIR ............. 47

2.6 Adsorption of Carbon Monoxide (CO) on the Graphene Surface ............................... 55

2.7 Electrochemical Properties of Graphene .................................................................... 58

2.7.1 Electrodepositing of Cu on Graphene .......................................................... 61

2.8 References ................................................................................................................... 63

CHAPTER 3: BISMUTH (Bi) UNDERPOTENTIAL DEPOSITION (UPD) ON RUTHENIUM (Ru) ........... 66

3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 66

v

Page 7: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

3.2 The Effect of the Ambient on Bismuth under Potential Deposition (UPD) on

Ruthenium ........................................................................................................................ 68

3.3 Anion Effect on Bismuth under Potential Deposition (UPD) on Ruthenium............... 72

3.4 XPS Analysis of Bi UPD on Ru under Different Conditions .......................................... 77

3.5 The Ring Rotating Disc Electrode (RRDE) Result of Bi Deposition on Ru .................... 82

3.6 Bi Bulk on Ru Result .................................................................................................... 90

3.7 Proposed Mechanism of Bi Deposition on Ru ............................................................ 92

3.8 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 96

3.9 References ................................................................................................................... 97

CHAPTER 4: CHARACTERIZATION OF PLASMA TREATED INTER-LAYER DIELECTRIC (ILD) ULTRA-

LOW-K USING XPS AND FTIR ......................................................................................................... 99

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 99

4.2 Characterizations of Dielectric Damages on Blanket Wafer Using FT-IR .................. 101

4.3 XPS Characterizations of Dielectric Damages on Blanket Wafer .............................. 104

4.4 Characterization of ILD Plasma Treatment Using AFM and Optical Microscope ...... 111

4.5 Conclusion and Future Work ..................................................................................... 115

4.6 References ................................................................................................................. 117

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK………………………………………………………………………119

5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 119

5.2 Future Work .............................................................................................................. 121

COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF REFERENCES ...................................................................................... 123

vi

Page 8: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1: The measurement of AFM roughness of TEL blanket wafer before and after treatment

with O2 plasma…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….115

vii

Page 9: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Chemical vapor deposition (CVD) reactor for graphene growth system with the gas

flow controller and vacuum pumo……………………………………………………………………………………………3

Figure 1.2: Dual magnetron gun sputtering system of the Denton vacuum desktop pro, used for

physical vapor deposition (PVD).………………………………………………………………………………………………..5

Figure 1.3: Schematic of layers of electrolyte in electrochemical system …...…………………………….7

Figure 1.4: A three electrode system illustration …...………………………………………………………………….8

Figure 1.5: Example of the CV of the Bi UPD on Ru with the background.…………………………………10

Figure 1.6: Electrochemical quartz crystal microbalance (EQCM) cell setup.…………………………….11

Figure 1.7: (a) The arrangement of RRDE showing the disc electrode in the center and the ring

electrode separated by isolated material next to it. (b) The flow pattern on the RDEE of the

electrolyte while rotating ……..…………………………………………………………………………………………………13

Figure 1.8: X-ray photoelectron spectrometer (XPS) PHI 5000 VersaprobeTM, CART XPS

instruments.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….15

Figure 1.9: FTIR spectrometer layout ……..……………………………………………………………………………….17

Figure 1.10: Attenuated total reflectance ATR representing the mechanism of the reflected light

and the sample characterization.……………………………………………………………………………………………..18

Figure 1. 11: Anti-Stokes and Stokes lines in Raman spectroscopy. …………………………………………20

Figure 1.12: Almega XR Raman spectrometer from Thermo Scientific Nicolet, CART Raman

instrument.………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………23

Figure 1.13: Atomic force microscope AFM picture in our lab.………………………………………………….25

viii

Page 10: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 1.14: Scanning electron microscope (SEM) FEI Nova NanoSEM 230, CART SEM

instrument. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27

Figure 2.1: Diagram of CVD growth on copper…………………………………………………………………………33

Figure 2.2: Chemical vapor deposition (CVD) graphene system in our lab.……………………………….35

Figure 2.3: Graphene growth process diagram.………………………………………………………………………..36

Figure 2.4: a) Photo of copper foil before graphene growth b) Photo of copper foil after

graphene growth.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….37

Figure 2.5: Process of transfer CVD graphene to other substrate.…………………………………………….38

Figure 2.6: Water contact angle measurement.………………………………………………………………………..41

Figure 2.7: Raman spectra of graphene on Cu and graphene on 300 nm SiO2 developed in our

lab.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..42

Figure 2.8: Raman spectra difference between graphene and graphite ……..……………………………43

Figure 2.9: a) Shows the frequency of the QCM before transfer graphene. b) Shows the

frequency after the transfer of graphene.………………………………………………………………………………..45

Figure 2.10: a) Reported AFM image of a boundary between a graphene monolayer and a SiO2

substrate. b) Reported AFM image of a boundary between a graphene monolayer and a mica

substrate……...………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….46

Figure 2.11: FT-IR spectra of hydrogenation of graphene and loss after 45min.……………………….48

Figure 2.12: Anticipated graphene hydrogenation structure in certain spots show vacant

between the carbons of graphene and not covered all the carbon …….…………………………………..49

Figure 2.13: Differential FT-IR spectra of hydrogenated graphene using H2 plasma.…………………50

Figure 2.14: Graphene hydrogenation, in this case, there is one carbon atom separating

ix

Page 11: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

them ………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………51

Figure 2.15: Graphene hydrogenation, in this case, the 2 H atoms are separated by a multiple

carbon atoms, which classifies it as the “Far” structure……...……………………………………………………51

Figure 2.16: MIR-IR spectra of graphene with few atoms Cu sputtered plasma hydrogenation

detected using MR-IR for 45degree polarization.……………………………………………………………………..53

Figure 2.17: Raman spectra of graphene before and after plasma hydrogenation.…………………..55

Figure 2.18: The adsorption of CO on pristine graphene transferred to Ru QCM.……………………..56

Figure 2.19: Schematic view of a single gas molecule (NH3) adsorption on pristine graphene

(a)TM–graphene (b). T, top site; B, bridge site; H, hollow site; M, transition metal atom (Au).

Carbon atom in gray, H in white, N in blue and Au atom in yellow ……..……………………………………57

Figure 2.20: The adsorption of CO on graphene transferred to Ru QCM embedded with 5nm Cu.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………58

Figure 2.21: Comparison of the CVs between Ru electrode and graphene on Ru wafer electrode.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………59

Figure 2.22: Comparison of the CVs between GC electrode and graphene on Ru wafer electrode.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………60

Figure 2.23: CV’s for Cu foil, graphene, and GC electrodes in hexacyanoferrate(III).…………………61

Figure 2.24: a) Graphene on Ru wafer before electroplating with 2mMCu. b) Graphene on Ru

wafer after electroplating with 2mMCu.…………………………………………………………………………………..62

Figure 3.1: Ambient effect of Bi deposition on Ru. (a.) CV of Bi deposition on Ru. Scan rate of

5mV/s. (b.) Zoom-in view of CV in Bi UPD region. (c.) Mass response. (d.) Zoom-in view of mass

response in Bi UPD region………………………………………………………………………………………………………..70

x

Page 12: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 3.2: (a.) Bi UPD MLMass (Cathodic) calculated in different scan rate, N2 purge (black line),

lab ambient (red line), and O2 purge (Green line). b.) Bi UPD MLCharge (Cathodic) calculated in

different scan rate, N2 purge (black line), lab ambient (red line), and O2 purge (Green line).

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………70

Figure 3.3: Anion effect of Bi deposition on Ru. (a.) CV of Bi deposition on Ru. Scan rate of

5mV/s. (b.) Zoom-in view of CV in Bi UPD region. (c.) Mass response. (d.) Zoom-in view of mass

response in Bi UPD region.……………………………………………………………………………………………………….73

Figure 3.4: Bi UPD (MLCharge – MLMass) vs scan rate of Bi3+ containing solution (a) in H2SO4 and (b.)

in HClO4.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………74

Figure 3.5: Scan rate effect and ambient effect of Bi UPD ML coverage on Ru in 0.5M H2SO4

+1mM Bi3+ (a.) MLMass (cathodic) (b.) MLMass (anodic) (c.) MLCharge (cathodic) (d.) MLCharge

(anodic). …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………75

Figure 3.6: Scan rate effect and ambient effect of Bi UPD ML coverage on Ru in 0.5M HClO4 +

1mM Bi3+ (a.) MLMass (cathodic) (b.) MLMass (anodic) (c.) MLCharge (cathodic) (d.) MLCharge (anodic).

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………76

Figure 3.7: XPS of Bi UPD N2 purge deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 with high

scan rate (50mV/s) of depositing Bi on Ru electrode.……………………………………………………………….77

Figure 3.8: XPS of Bi UPD non- purge deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 with high

scan rate (50mV/s) of depositing Bi on Ru electrode.……………………………………………………………….78

Figure 3.9: XPS Bi UPD on Ru (no N2 purge) Ru 3d Region at 280 eV which represent the Ru

metal or native oxide……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….79

Figure 3.10: XPS of Bi UPD deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 with low scan rate

xi

Page 13: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

(5mV/s) of depositing Bi on Ru electrode.………………………………………………………………………………..80

Figure 3.11: XPS of Bi UPD deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M HClO4.……………………………81

Figure 3.12: XPS of Bi UPD deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 under N2 with rinse

with water after deposition.…………………………………………………………………………………………………….82

Figure 3.13: RRDE system sketch.……………………………………………………………………………………………..84

Figure 3.14: The result of Bi UPD on Ru RRDE system (O2- saturated) a.) The ring current b.) The

disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.………………………………………………………86

Figure 3.15: The result of Ru background RRDE system (O2- saturated) a.) The ring current b.)

The disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.………………………………………………..86

Figure 3.16: The result of Ru background RRDE system in 0.5M HClO4 (O2- saturated) a.) The ring

current b.) The disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.……………………………….89

Figure 3.17: The result of of Bi UPD on Ru RRDE system in 0.5M HClO4 (O2- saturated) a.) The

ring current b.) The disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.………………………..89

Figure 3.18: XPS of Bi bulk on Ru. N2 purge. 5 mV/s and hold at ~-0.6V for 7 mins. Sputter rate:

0.5 nm/min and/or 2.3 nm/min (calibrated to SiO2). (a.) Bi 4f (H2SO4) (b.) Bi 4f (HClO4) (c.) O 1s

(H2SO4) (d.) O 1s (HClO4)…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..90

Figure 3.19: XPS of Bi bulk on Ru. N2 purge. 5 mV/s, hold at ~-0.6V for 7 mins, and then expose

to air for 1 hour. Sputter rate: 0.5 nm/min and/or 2.3 nm/min (calibrated to SiO2). (a.) Bi 4f

(HClO4) (b.) O 1s (HClO4) (c.) Ru 3d (HClO4) (d.) Cl 2p (HClO4).………………………………………………….91

Figure 3.20: (a.) CV and mass response of Bi deposition on Ru. Scan rate of 5 mV/s. (b.) Zoom-in

view of CV and mass response in Bi UPD region.………………………………………………………………………92

Figure 4. 1: Organsilicate glass (OSG) proposed structure [13]……………………………………………….102

xii

Page 14: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 4.2: Schematic representation of Multiple internal reflections infrared (MIR-IR) with Si

attenuated total reflection (ATR).…………………………………………………………………………………………..102

Figure 4.3: FTIR spectra time dependent O2 plasma ashing on blanket wafer.………………………..103

Figure 4.4: ILD/low-k blanket wafer O2 treatment plots of IR absorption peak heights of CH3 and

OH vs. etching time for 1540sec.……………………………………………………………………………………………103

Figure 4.5: C 1s core-level spectra for pristine and O2 plasma treatment etching for 70sec un-

patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks show at 283.4 eV corresponds to Si-C, C-H [21] and the

peaks at 286.4 eV corresponds to C-O [21, 22].………………………………………………………………………105

Figure 4.6: C 1s core-level spectra for pristine and O2 plasma treatment etching from 100 to

1540sec un-patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks show at 284.2 eV corresponds to Si-C, C-H

[21] and the peaks at 286.4 eV corresponds to C-O [22].……………………………………………………….106

Figure 4.7: TIR spectra of a 300 nm blanket low-k films measured and normalized curve XPS C

(1s) of integrated area 280-290 eV after O2 plasma etching vs. etching time for 1540sec.……..107

Figure 4.8: C 1s core-level spectra for pristine and O2 plasma treatment etching for 70sec un-

patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks shows at 284.0eV correspond to Si-C, C-H [23] and the

peaks at 286.4 eV corresponds to C-O [23].……………………………………………………………………………109

Figure 4.9: C 1s core-level spectra for pristine and H2 plasma treatment etching for 70sec un-

patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks shows at 283.6 eV correspond to Si-C, C-H [23], and the

peaks at 285.6 eV corresponds to C=C and C-C, and the peaks at 286.4 eV C-O.…………………….109

Figure 4.10: Normalize curve Hydrogen plasma treatment of blanket wafer ILD/ low-k, analysis

of XPS C1s integrated area from 280-290eV.…………………………………………………………………………..110

Figure 4.11: Wafer before and after treatment of O2 plasma magnify for 100x. a) TEL blanket

xiii

Page 15: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

wafers as is wafer. b) TEL blanket wafers 100sec O2 plasma. c) TEL blanket wafers 640sec O2

plasma. d) TEL blanket wafers 1540sec O2 plasma.…………………………………………………………………112

Figure 4.12: a) AFM image roughness of as is blanket wafer. b) AFM image roughness of 100sec

O2 plasma treatment blanket wafer.……………………………………………………………………………………….113

Figure 4.13: a) AFM image roughness of 640sec O2 plasma treatment blanket wafer. b) AFM

image roughness of 1540sec O2 plasma treatment blanket wafer.………………………………………….114

Figure 5.1: CV and Mass response on the deposition of the Bi UPD on Ru…………………………….122

xiv

Page 16: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION OF INSTRUMENTS

1.1 Introduction

In this dissertation work, several surface characterization instruments alongside with the

electrochemical characterization tools were used in our lab. On graphene project which is one

of the major part of my dissertation, a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) reactor was built in

house for graphene growth. Raman, FT-IR and some electrochemical techniques was used for

graphene characterization. Moreover, rotating ring disk electrode (RRDE), X-ray photoelectron

spectroscopy (XPS), and electrochemical quartz crystal microbalance (EQCM) were the

instruments utilized to accomplish the work on bismuth (Bi) under potential deposition (UPD)

on ruthenium (Ru). Beside all the instruments mentioned earlier some work was needed to use

other instruments or techniques such as atomic force spectroscopy (AFM), physical vapor

deposition (PVD), and scanning electron microscope (SEM) for other purposes or to check same

experiment with different techniques.

1.2 Thin Film Deposition

1.2.1 Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) Reactor for Graphene Growth

Chemical vapor deposition (CVD) is a process used to deposit a solid thin film material

on a substrate [1]. It is a very popular method in the semiconductor industry to produce thin

film layers. Usually the source of the thin film deposited on the substrate is gases which

introduce under vacuum with heat or high frequency voltage. There are different types of CVD

processed such as, atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition (APCVD), low pressure

1

Page 17: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

chemical vapor deposition (LPCVD), and plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD).

The mechanism of all types of CVD process is rather similar. The precursor gases are introduced

to the reaction chamber which elevated to certain temperature of interest. When the gases

pass through the chamber, it will contact the hot substrate surface which will be good

environment for a reaction or decompose forming a thin film layer at the cooled down system.

There are several factors that can affect the quality of the thin film produced on the

substrate like, the temperature, the purity and concentration of the gases, and the vacuum

pressure. The CVD process mostly produces well control and uniform film with high quality, fine

grained, and impervious. As figure 1.1 represents the basic component of the CVD machine

includes gas delivery system, reactor chamber, and vacuum system. CVD technique has very

important applications in the industry and research. For instance, CVD has been used to

produce optical fibers in the telecommunications industry, coating films in the semiconductors

industry, and graphene which is new material with promising applications in the computer

technology [2].

2

Page 18: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Not only can the CVD process deposit a thin layer on the substrate, but it can also

control the thickness and quality. The thin layer deposit using this system can reach up to 0.1nm

(10pm) for a monolayer [3, 4]. Figure 1.1 shows the actual CVD machine which was created in

Dr. Chyan’s lab in order to grow a large area of graphene.

1.2.2 Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), Sputtering Instrument

Physical vapor deposition (PVD) is another technique used mainly to deposit thin film on

other substrates which is wildly used on the solar cells and semiconductors industries. The

process on the PVD is similar to the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) except the precursor of

the PVD is in solid form instead of gas like in the CVD. The PVD process is carried out under high

Figure 1.1: Chemical vapor deposition (CVD) reactor for graphene growth system with the gas flow controller and vacuum pump.

3

Page 19: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

vacuum conditions which could reach up to 10-6 torr [5]. PVD go through several steps to

achieve thin film deposition. The first step of the process is evaporation which will be related to

the target (the material that the researchers are interested to be deposited on the substrate). To

change the target from the solid phase to vapor, the target was bombarded with high energy

source of ions or electrons beams, like argon (Ar). The second step transports or transfers the

vaporized atoms to deposit on the substrate by line of sight deposition. Then next is the

reaction which is extra step which could be carried out, depend on the study and concern. For

example, if adding oxidation to the coated sample was involved, oxygen gas during PVD process

can be included or any other chemical of interest specific to the intent of application. Finally, the

deposition of the thin film layers on to the substrate surface. Depending on the characteristics

of both of the target and the substrate, the resulting coating can be very strong, mild, or weak

in term of mechanical properties. There are many applications and objectives. Many coatings

employed to prevent corrosion and resist the frictions. Also, it can increase the hardness of

some material, and improve smoothness of the surface [6].

4

Page 20: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 1.1: Dual magnetron gun sputtering system of the Denton vacuum desktop pro, used for physical vapor deposition (PVD).

As it can be seen from figure 1.2, the PVD machine consists of different component. Our

Denton vacuum desktop pro sputtering machine has two different guns technique to attach the

target for sputtering, DC and RF. This sputtering system prepared a direct current (DC) power

and a radio frequency (RF) power magnetron guns. The high radio frequency links to the

alternating currents which permit to coat insulating material. Using the RF gun isolated material

such as Si or SiO2 can be sputtered. Also, our instrument has an advantage to deposit two

materials simultaneously.

1.3 Electrochemistry

1.3.1 Fundamentals of Electrochemistry

Electrochemistry is one of the branches of chemistry which is concerned with

5

Page 21: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

monitoring and determining the charge transfer between the materials. Most of the

electrochemistry is studied in solution that requires good conductivity. Therefore, an electrolyte

must be added to the solution to complete the circuit. During the charge transfer between

materials (electrodes), it involves electron movement which is produce electricity that can be

useful for so many applications such as fuel cell and solar system. Moreover, electrochemistry

can be employed to detect trace amount of some chemicals which has unique characteristics for

redox and electron structure, such as tracing the transition state of some reactions.

1.3.2 The Nature of Electrochemical System

Electrochemistry system is not homogenous, it is heterogeneous. That is because of the

electrochemical interaction taking place across the interface of the solid electrode and the

electrolyte solution. There are three distinctive layers on the electrochemical reaction. The first

is the double layer which is the interaction between the electrode and the electrolyte. The

double layer mostly has about 100Ao thickness. Then the diffusion layer which comes between

the double layer and the bulk layer. This layer is resulted from the difference in the

concentration of the electroreactant and product. The last layer is the bulk layer which is the

rest of the component that is far away from the electrode.

6

Page 22: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 1.2: Schematic of layers of electrolyte in electrochemical system [7].

Some of the electrochemical reaction is simple and easy to monitor, and some is very

complicated. There is a lot of thing happened on the surface of the electrode all of sudden

which need special attraction and preparation. In this dissertation many electrochemical

reactions were observed and investigated using different technique as it will be shown later.

1.3.3 Three Electrode System

Three electrode cells is one of the most used electrochemical techniques to study the

properties of materials and electrodes. As it’s well known the regular two electrode system

consists of the reference and working electrode. The three electrode system added another one

which is called as counter electrode or auxiliary electrode. The function of the counter electrode

is to keep the charge balance of the system which will provide electrons when there is a loss

7

Page 23: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

and gain electrons when there is excess. Most of the counter electrodes are made of noble or

inert materials such as, noble metals or graphite. The other electrode is the reference electrode

which has known half-cell potentials that the analyst can refer the measurement to it. The last

electrode is the working electrode which is the electrode that the characteristic and reaction on

its surface is explored. Using the electrochemical technique the potential, current and charge

can be controlled to investigate different kind of properties and find out new catalysts and much

more. Three electrode system was used frequently on the bismuth UPD on ruthenium study.

Figure 1.3: A three electrode system illustration [8].

1.3.4 Open Circuit Potential (OCP)

Open circuit potentials (OCP) is one of the electrochemical techniques which can

measure the potential of the working electrode surface versus the reference electrode when

there is no external potential or current applied on the system. OCP used to measure the

equilibrium between the electrode and the solution which reflects to the cleanliness and

8

Page 24: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

oxidation state of the electrode.

1.3.5 Cyclic Voltammetry (CV)

Cyclic voltammetry (CV) is one of the most often used electrochemical techniques which

can reveal rich information about the oxidation reduction state of the chemical of interest. The

principle of the CV is to measure the current developed on the working electrode surface when

excess of potential is applied. Moreover, by sweeping the potential linearly back and forth, the

CV data provide efficient monitoring of the reaction status developed and study the reaction at

any point. This process can enlighten us with the characteristics and the properties of the

electrode as well as the analyte.

As it can be seen on figure 1.5 the difference of the cyclic voltammetry between the

background and the target deposit material on the surface. The feature of the deposition

characteristics and the changes happening during the sweeping can clearly be identified and

studied.

9

Page 25: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.3.6 Electrochemical Quartz Crystal Microbalance (EQCM)

Electrochemical quartz crystal microbalance (EQCM) is a powerful tool for the

investigation of the dynamics system changes on the materials of the electrodes. EQCM

connected the change of the mass with the change of the electrical charges using the Sauerbrey

equation together with Faraday's law [9]. The theory of electrochemical quartz crystal

microbalance (EQCM) is to combine the electrochemistry technique with quartz crystal

microbalance (QCM) to study the property of an electrode.

Figure 1.4: Example of the CV of the Bi UPD on Ru with the background.

10

Page 26: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 1.5: Electrochemical quartz crystal microbalance (EQCM) cell setup.

EQCM technique gives us the advantages to measure the mass change during the

deposition and stripping as well as the electrochemical charge change. By comparing these

variables in the same time rich information can be found on the side reactions or deposition.

Moreover, it is very sensitive to any change on the surface of the conditions of the surroundings

which in our interest to explore; the sensitivity of the EQCM in our set up can reach up to sub

nano-gram which can translate to how many monolayers. Calculating the mass change using

Sauerbrey equation [10] which accounts for the relationship between the mass change and the

frequency change, reveal much information about mechanism and kinetic of the reaction.

Sauerbrey equation shows the linear relationship between the mass change and its

corresponding change in vibration frequency. Also, variation of the deposition time on the QCM

can give us the good information on the growth mechanism. By calculate the number of the

11

Page 27: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

monolayers in different times, the growth mechanisms of layer by layer or 3D mechanism can

be determined. The electron transfer can be monitored simultaneously with the mass change as

different conditions to determine if there is a co-deposition of the reaction products on the

surface of the electrode or not.

1.3.7 Rotating Disk Electrode System (RED) and Rotating Ring Disk Electrode System (RRDE)

Rotating disk electrode system (RED) is one of the three electrode system where the

working electrode is rotating during the experiment [11]. This rotation creates a flux which

provides the electrode with electrolyte constantly. The continuous flow keeps the reaction going

and give better chance to make it happened. The extra rotation to the working electrode, give

good information to study the reaction mechanism and investigate the rate of the chemical

reaction. Rotating ring disk electrode system (RRDE) is similar to the RDE with double working

electrode. The function of the second working electrode is to reverse what is happening on the

first one. For example if there is and oxidation reaction happened on the first electrode, some

potential can be applied to reduce it and vice versa. In this way the quantity of the reaction can

be determined and measured the rate. RRDE is one of the best techniques used to determine

the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) which is very important aspect in the proton exchange

membrane fuel cells (PEMFC). There three different movement that control the reaction and

charge transfer on the RDE and RRDE which are diffusion, convection, and migration.

.As it can be seen from the figure 1.6 The RDE and RRDE are similar in the all of the component

expect for second working electrode for the RRDE. The RDE and RRDE were used to determine

the ORR of the Bi UPD on Ru.

12

Page 28: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

a) b)

Figure 1.6: (a) The arrangement of RRDE showing the disc electrode in the center and the ring electrode separated by isolated material next to it [12]. (b) The flow pattern on the RDEE of the electrolyte while rotating [13].

1.4 Surface Analysis Techniques

Several instrument can be identify as a surface analysis techniques. At University of North

Texas (UNT), there is a big facility providing a lot of surface instruments called the Center for

Advanced Research and Technology (CART) which can be used by student and faculty. In this

dissertation, some of these instruments such as X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS),

scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and Raman as well as the instrument in our lab, Fourier

transform-infrared spectroscopy and atomic force spectroscopy were utilized. The surface

analysis instruments are very important in the industrial work because it will provide more

details on the surface chemical characterization, the functional bonds and types, and thin film

characterization. The surface sensitivity of some of these instruments can reach few

nanometers like the XPS [14].

13

Page 29: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.4.1 X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS)

X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, or ESCA (electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis),

is a powerful instrument. XPS can determine the surface element and chemical bonds

composition which can lead to the chemical structure. The samples exposed with high energy

monochromatic x-ray source such as kα-Al of 1486.6eV or kα-Mg of 1253.6eV [15] which

stimulate the electron on the core level from the atoms within the surface. The kinetic energy

(KE) of these released electrons can be measured from the instrument, and the binding energy

(BE) can be calculated using the following equation:

BE= hv –KE

where:

KE: is the measured kinetic of the photoelectron ejected from the atom.

BE: is the binding energy.

hv: is the photon energy of the x-ray.

Then the detected energy of photoelectron is recorded by an analyzer. This detection showed in

a monitor and a signal or peak [16, 17]. Depending on the structure and environment of the

material, the BE has special characteristics which translate to an intensity and location. Almost

every element in the periodic table has a distinctive binding energy and chemical shift which

can guide the analyst to figure out the structure and composition except for hydrogen (H) and

helium (He).

14

Page 30: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Even though XPS is very powerful technique, it has some limitation. For example, the depth

of the surface analysis of the sample depending on the taking-off angle is between 1-10nm.

Also, XPS is line of sight technique which mean it can analyze what on the surface not what

behind or in between like tranches if they bigger than 10 nm. Using the depth profiling to do

after the 10nm, make it less accurate and a destructive technique. Regardless these limitations

still XPS is one of most important instrument used in the researches and industry. It use in the

polymer industry, semiconductors, and corrosion research.

1.4.2 Fourier Transform-Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy

Infrared spectroscopy has been one of the best techniques to identify the chemical

structure and the functional group. Infrared spectra correspond to a special fingerprint of each

Figure 1.7: X-ray photoelectron spectrometer (XPS) PHI 5000 VersaprobeTM, CART XPS instruments.

15

Page 31: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

structure and bond connection with response of absorption peak. This absorption is related to

the vibrations and frequencies of each bond in the sample. Almost every different structure has

unique frequencies that can identify that difference. Nowadays, the IR techniques have been

extensively improved to be not just an identification tool, but also a quantitative one. Using the

new modern software with the algorithms, make IR more comprehensive instrument. There are

many types and modifications of the infrared spectroscopy that can enhance the instrument

work. For example, developing of the Fourier transforms infrared (FT-IR), enhances the

sensitivity and the resolution [18]. Moreover, the detect time using FT-IR is greatly reduced

which make it more productive and save a lot of many. In FT-IR the sample preparation and type

play a big role in getting good result. For instance, the KBr disk is used for the powder samples;

the liquid cell for the liquid samples, attenuated total reflectance (ATR) is a sampling technique

for solid and liquid, and others. In general the mechanism of the FT-IR is very simple. The

infrared light is emitted from a light source. The light beam passes through an aperture which

determines the size spot of the light. The beam transmitted or reflected on the sample

depending on the nature of the material. This is, also, where the absorption corresponds to the

frequencies of the bonds on the sample. Finally the light goes to detector to measure the

differences between the initial light and the final one and translate the differences to a signal on

the computer (IR-scheme R-drive).

%T = I/Io

where %T is transmittance; I is the intensity measured with a sample in the beam (from the

sample single beam spectrum); Io is the intensity measured from the back ground spectrum

16

Page 32: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

The absorbance spectrum can be calculated from the transmittance spectrum using the

following equation.

A = -log10 T

where A is the absorbance.

Due to the fact that FT-IR is a subtraction technique, background spectrum should be collected

to get a relative scale for the absorption which shows more details and better resolution.

Figure 1.8: FTIR spectrometer layout [19].

17

Page 33: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.4.2.1 Attenuated Total Reflectance (ATR)

Attenuated total reflectance (ATR) is a sampling technique which increase the sensitivity

up to 100times the normal one. This sensitivity huge jump allows FT-IR to detect change to the

sub-nanometer. the Multiple internal reflection MIR-IR which accompany with the ATR make the

light to reflect inside the sample many times and collect more information which enhance the

sensitivity and resolution As it can be seen in figurer 1.9.

Figure 1.9: Attenuated total reflectance ATR representing the mechanism of the reflected light and the sample characterization.

The bounce of the light inside the crystal is due to the reflective index between the

crystal and the air. If another material is added on the surface of the crystal the bounce of the

light still going, but there is some light escape which called surface evanescent wave [18]. This

evanescent wave is very important because it can interact with the material on Si ATR surface

that the chemical bonding information can be identified with the subtraction from the

background.

To detector Infrared light ATR Crystal

Sample

18

Page 34: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.4.3 Raman Spectroscopy

Raman and IR are the most common vibrational spectroscopies for assessing molecular

motion and fingerprinting species. Even though the Raman effect was revealed more than

eighty years ago, Raman spectroscopy was not used until the discovery of the laser in the late

1950s. Raman spectroscopy gives information about molecular vibrations to identify and

quantize [20]. Raman involves shining a laser monochromatic light source on a sample and

detecting the scattered light. Most of the scattered light will be in the same frequency as the

excitation source which is called Rayleigh or elastic scattering. The rest of the scattered light is

shifted in energy because of the interactions between the confrontation of the vibrational

energy levels and electromagnetic waves of the molecules in the sample which will be showed

as a spectrum [21, 22]. Some examples of sources used in Raman spectrometers are:

helium/neon laser, argon-ion laser, and neodymium yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd: YAG) laser.

The most common laser used in Raman spectroscopy is operating at 532 nm and 785 nm

especially for biological and medical samples. The scattered radiation is measured by a detector

at some angle, usually at 90 degrees. Germanium (Ge) detector is an example of a detector used

in Raman spectrometer [20].

Raman basic principle is based on inelastic scattering of a monochromatic excitation

source. When the radiation goes through a transparent medium, the chemical sample

ineleastically scatters radiation in all directions and this small fraction of radiation is scattered

differently from the incident beam. This difference in the incident beam and the shifts in

wavelength depend upon the chemical structure of the sample [20, 21]. The routine energy

range for most of Raman spectroscopy is between wavenumber 200 to 4000 cm–1.

19

Page 35: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

In molecular systems, these frequencies are principally in the ranges associated with

rotational, vibrational and electronic level transitions. The scattered radiation happens in every

direction and can have a detectable change in its polarization as well as its wavelength. Rayleigh

scattering is when there is a scattering process with no change in frequency. Raman scattering

is the difference in wavelength or frequency of light. Raman can shift photons higher or lower

energy, depending on the vibrational state of the molecule. Stokes scattering is stronger than

Anti-Stokes. In Stokes scattering a photon is scattered at lower energy and shifts the

wavelength toward the end of the spectrum. Raman scattering effect is when the molecule

starts at ground vibrational state due to the Raman spectra taken at room temperature. Anti-

Stokes Raman scattering is when a small fraction of molecules will have a higher vibrational

level, thus the scattered photon can be scattered at a higher energy.

Figure 1. 10: Anti-Stokes and Stokes lines in Raman spectroscopy.

20

Page 36: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Raman is closely related to infrared absorption in that they use the same type of

quantized vibrational changes and rotational energy levels. However IR is a direct absorption

process where as Raman is a scattering process. Raman requires a changing polarizability while

IR requires a dipole moment. Also, the light source is different in the IR they used white light

source like Deuterium, while in Raman they used laser to illuminate the sample. Some of the

matrix effect like water is eliminated in Raman because Raman doesn’t respond to water while

in IR water is all over the spectra. Not being able to see water in the spectra makes Raman ideal

for biological research. Although they affect the samples in different ways they complement

each other very well. For example, with a sample that does not have a dipole moment, IR

would not be able to detect the chemical bonds; however Raman spectroscopy can detect it.

Likewise, for a sample which has photoresist properties and can’t be excited by Raman

irradiation, it can be detected on the IR.

Resonance Raman happens when the wavelength of the laser is close to an excited

electronic state of a bond in molecule, i.e. where it is strongly absorbed or fluoresces, the signal

enhancement can be increased by a factor between 100 and 106. In this case the concentration

of the analyte can be very low up to 10-8 molar and Raman detector still can detect it. Since the

Raman resonance is restricted to the Raman bands associated with the chromophore, the

Raman resonance spectra usually only consists of a few lines. As the line intensities in a Raman

resonance experiment enhance quickly as the excitation wavelength gets near the wavelength

of the electronic absorption peak [20]. To receive the best signal sensitivity, a laser with a

mechanical attunement is required. When the laser radiation increased, the sample

decomposition became a big problem. For this reason, the electronic absorption peaks are

21

Page 37: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

usually found in the ultraviolet region. The solution to this problem is to flow the sample past

the focused beam of the laser. This way only a small piece of the sample is irradiated at any

moment during the process [16]. Although Raman resonance has this big advantage which you

can select a wavelength to enhance the sensitivity to a particular type of bond or vibrations, it

has a potential disadvantages which are increased fluorescence and increase

absorption/heating [22].

Raman is a very powerful instrument and specific toward chemical structures. It can

analyze samples in gas, liquid and solid forms. Raman spectroscopy can provide information

about crystallite dimension, clustering of the sp2 phase, the existence of sp2-sp3 hybridization,

the chemical impurities, the optical energy gap, the amount of the mass density, and strain [21].

Furthermore, it can be used to detect graphene layers, nanotube diameter, defects and other

crystal disorder, doping, elastic constants, edge structure chirality, curvature, and lastly the

metallic and semiconducting behavior. Raman is the best technique to be used to detect the

single carbon nanotube and graphene and distinguish between the numbers of layers of

graphene in the sample. Also, it can tell if the graphene is pure or it has impurities [22].

22

Page 38: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 1.11: Almega XR Raman spectrometer from Thermo Scientific Nicolet, CART Raman instrument.

Raman spectroscopy became in popularity among analytical chemists and in

pharmaceutical fields. It is powerful and easy technique with so many applications which make

it very useful. No sample preparation is needed specifically to use this technique which saves

time and effort. Raman spectroscopy has become a standard method for materials

characterization and it is finding greater acceptance in industrial process monitoring. In

addition, these days Raman is employed in the pharmaceutical applications to determine

content in various quantity forms, and its necessity increase and look promising.

23

Page 39: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.5 Surface Microscope

Recent advancements of surface imaging microscope allow effective nanometer scale

imaging of sample surface. The atomic force microscope (AFM) is one of surface imaging

microscopes which has the ability to magnify 1000 times more than the regular microscope.

Also, the scanning electron microscope is another one which used x-ray to and the secondary

electron to capture the image of the sample and go down to ~1pm size of the image sample.

Many others microscopes can do surface analysis under different condition such as

environmental scanning electron microscope (ESEM), transmission electron microscope (TEM),

and others. In this dissertation the AFM and SEM is our emphasis since they used directly in my

work.

1.5.1 Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM)

Atomic force microscope (AFM) is one of best scanning probe techniques to sense and

scan the feature of the sample to draw a 3D image. AFM is using a silicon nitride tip to contact

with the sample. The oscillation of the tip is the feedback to draw and build an image on the

screen. AFM can help nano-technology researchers to do nano-scan on the sample surface of

their interest. Also, it can be employed to locate the defect and measure the roughness of the

sample. The principle of the AFM is based on the force between the cantilever angle on the tip

and the sample topographies which is moves up and down to adjust accordingly is adjusted

accordingly. AFM uses a laser light that reflect on the back of the cantilever tip to detect the

change on the sample surface which is oscillated. The change of the laser position give the

feedback on the image adjusted on the screen. The topography of the sample surface is a

24

Page 40: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

translation of the force between the sample feature and the cantilever with the laser reflection.

If the tip is scanning through the specimen, the tip is adjusted by the feedback to keep the

cantilever oscillation between the sample and the tip constant. Several kind of contact modes

can be used to scan the surface of the sample depending on the nature and sensitivity of the

sample. AFM have contact mode for insensitive samples, and non-contact and tapping modes

for sensitive samples. The contact mode is employed with a static mode of the tip. The static tip

deflect is the way the feedback can be acquired depending on the repulsive force between the

tip and the electrons of the atoms. Non-contact mode, the tip doesn’t touch the sample surface,

but uses the oscillation within few nanometers [23] to draw the picture based on the

differences of the van der Waals forces occurs during the approach. The last kind is the tapping

mode which is used to image the soft samples that could be damaged with contact mode of the

AFM. As the name refers the tip oscillate as the sample scans. The difference of the height of

the oscillation is used as the feedback signal to draw the picture. AFM can scan conductive and

nonconductive samples using these modes [24, 25].

Figure 1.12: Atomic force microscope AFM picture in our lab.

25

Page 41: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.5.2 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) is a microscope that uses electron instead of light

to image the surface of the sample. In the SEM there is an electron gun firing electrons, coils,

and lenses. Most of the specimen of this type of electron should be conductive. For non-

conductive samples the image will not be clear, it will show a glow. There are several solutions

to picture non-conductive samples such as sputter some gold particles and then take the

picture. The principle of SEM of images the sample surface is depending on the secondary

electrons detected after the primary electron (gun electron) hit the surface and eject some of

the surface electrons. The high energy beam electrons sometimes can penetrate to further that

the surface atoms located which ejected the secondary electrons. These electrons called backed

scattered electrons which can be detected with different detector. If the gun electron went

deeper in the sample it can cause x-ray which need special detector to catch it [26- 28].

26

Page 42: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 1.13: Scanning electron microscope (SEM) FEI Nova NanoSEM 230, CART SEM instrument.

As it can be seen on figure 1.13 the scanning electron microscope is consist of a column

generate the primary electrons. Specimen chamber contains the stage where the samples can

place. The secondary detector is located above the sample chamber. Then, the Software which

is control the SEM and transfer the signal to monitor to visualize the image of the sample.

27

Page 43: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

1.6 References

1. Stoffel, A.; Kovacs, A.; Kronast, W.; Muller, R. J. Micromech. Microeng. 1996, 6, 1-13.

2. Chen, I.; Jang, C.; Xiao, S.; Ishigami, M.; Fuhrer, M. Nature Nanotechnology 2008, 3, 206 –

209.

3. Suntola, T. Handbook of Crystal Growth, D. T. J. Hurle, Editor, Chap. 14, Elsevier Science B. V.,

Amsterdam 1994, 3.

4. Leskela, M.; Ritala, M. Thin Solid Films 2002, 409, 138.

5. Willey, R. R. Practical Design of Optical Thin Films, (Willey Optical, Consultants, Charlevoix,

Mich., 2007), pp.45-46.

6. http://www.ionfusion.com/technology

7. Xiliang, L.; Jason, J. D. Chem Soc Rev. 2013, 42, 5944.

8. http://physicalchemistryresources.com/book_1_sections_graphicfiles_06152009/MPC_ec_

Voltammetry_06152009/PC_ec_Voltammetry_05262009_web_05302009.htm

9. Flatgen, G.; Wasle, S.; Lubke, M.; Eickes, C.; Radhakrishnan, G.; Doblhofer, K.; Ert, G.

Electrochim. Acta. 1999, 44, 4499.

10. Sauerbrey, Günter (April 1959) Zeitschrift für Physik 155.

11. http://www.neoscience.co.kr/products/prod_view.php?cls=030110&prod_code=0000255

12. http://electroanalisis.blogspot.com/2012/05/hydrodynamic-voltammetry.html

13. Bard, A.J.; Faulkner, L.R. Electrochemical Methods: Fundamentals and Applications. New

York: John Wiley & Sons, 2nd Edition, 2000.

14. Briggs, D.; Seah, M. Practical Surface Analysis. Volume 1 – Auger and X-ray Photoelectron

Spectroscopy. Second Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 1990.

28

Page 44: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

15. Wagner, C. D.; Riggs, W. M.; Davis, L. E.; Moulder, J. F. Handbook of X-ray Photoelectron

Spectroscopy, 1st ed. (G. E. Muilenberg, editor), Perkin-Elmer Corporation (Physical

Electronics), 1979.

16. Ebel, M.F., Absolute calibration of an X-Ray photoelectron Spectrometer, Journal of Electron

Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena 1976, 8, 213.

17. Vickerman, J. C., Ed. Surface Analysis - The Principal Techniques; John Wiley & Sons: New

York, 1997.

18. Stuart, H. Infrared Spectroscopy. Fundamentals and Applications 2004, John Wiley & Sons

Ltd.

19. http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Physical_Chemistry/Spectroscopy/Fundamentals/The_Power_

of_the_Fourier_Transform_for_Spectroscopists

20. Skoog, D.; Leary, J. Principles of Instrumental Analysis, fourth edition. Fort Worth: Saunders

College Publishing. 1992.

21. Prajapati, P.; Prajapati, A. Raman Spectroscopy: A Versatile Tool in Pharmaceutical Analysis,

International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research 2011, 9, 1, 57-64.

22. Robert, B. Resonance Raman spectroscopy, Photosynth Res 2009, 101,147–155.

23. Gross, L.; Mohn, F.; Moll, N.; Liljeroth, P.; Meyer, G. Science 2009, 325.

24. http://www.olympusconfocal.com/theory/confocalintro.html

25. Wickramashinghe, H. K. Sci. Am. 1989, 98.

26. Pool, R. Science, 1990, 247, 634.

29

Page 45: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

27. Jeffree, C. E.; Read, N. D. Ambient- and Low-temperature scanning electron microscopy. In

Hall, J. L.; Hawes, C. R. Electron Microscopy of Plant Cells 1991. London: Academic Press.

28. Goldstein, J.; Newbury, D E. ; Joy, D C. ; Lyman, C E. ; Echlin, P.; LIfshin, E.; Sawyer, L.;

Michael, J R. Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-ray Microanalysis (3 ed). Springer 2003.

30

Page 46: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

CHAPTER 2

GRAPHENE

2.1 Introduction

Graphene is a single layer of carbon wherein the carbon atoms are arranged in a pattern

like that of a honeycomb. Its unique mechanical and chemical properties make it very

interesting for many researchers. The sp2 graphene sheet is of great interest, especially in the

electronics industry, because of its inherent conductivity and transparency, which make it

effective for many applications in the industry, as well as because of its large surface area. The

sp2 sheet provides a large surface area and excellent electrical conductivity. These properties

make graphene an excellent candidate for applications in touch screens and display devices [1].

There are several ways to produce graphene, such as chemical vapor deposition (CVD),

physical vapor deposition (PVD), exfoliation directly from graphite, etc. One of the most

effective and practical ways to produce grapheme is to use a CVD machine because this results

in a large, uniform area of high quality; this is our focus in this dissertation. Furthermore, using

the CVD technique is effective for the direct growing of graphene on certain specific substrates

like copper. The graphene also can be transferred to different substrates, as will be discussed in

the section on this technique. These properties of CVD graphene make it highly compatible with

uses for various applications and studies. For example, graphene can be used as an

electrocatalyst for a fuel cell, and in applications taking advantage of its conductivity and

transparency, it can be used for conductive touchable and flexible screens and for high speed

transistors. Moreover, graphene can be reformed to produce different types of carbon

allotropes. If it is rolled, graphene forms a nanotube, graphene can be wrapped to form a bulky

31

Page 47: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

ball (florescence), and if layers of graphene are stacked on top of each other, the result is

graphite [2, 3].

2.2 Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) Procedure to Grow Graphene

The procedure of chemical vapor deposition depends on choosing a metal substrate; in

our case copper was chosen as the substrate because it is self-limited in dissolving carbon, so no

more than few layers (1-10 layers) at maximum will be produced [4, 5]. Then, using a furnace,

the metal substrate is heated to almost the melting point. The next step is to introduce

methane and hydrogen gas. Methane gas is a source of carbon which starts to dissolve on the

melting surface of copper. Hydrogen gas works as the catalyst to induce the dissolving of carbon

in the copper surface [5]. Also, it is very important to keep the surface free of oxygen and in the

reduced form; that is why hydrogen is used throughout the CVD process until the growing of

graphene is completed. Figure 2.1 illustrates the mechanism and the process of carbon

deposition on the copper surface.

Figure 2.1: Diagram Illustrating the Process of CVD growth on copper [6].

The furnace is cooled down quickly to keep the deposition of carbon on the metal

32

Page 48: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

surface and prevent the formation of bulky layers of graphene, which is more likely in the

deposition of graphite layers [7].

Growing graphene using this method has some limitations related to material properties

such as impurities, continuity, and uniformity. These limitations can be minimized, for graphene

CVD reaches almost the same purity of exfoliation graphene. One of the important parameters

in growing CVD graphene is the use of high purity hydrogen and methane gases, which will

minimize the impurities and enhance the uniformity and continuity of the graphene formation.

Another challenge in producing graphene using the CVD process is the wrinkling of the

graphene which happens due to the difference in the expansion between the copper atoms and

the graphene atoms during the processes of annealing and cooling. This can be avoided using

proper annealing and a small sized copper surface. Several factors can affect the quality and

number of layers of graphene grown using CVD. For instance, more methane gas results in more

carbon atoms, leading to a greater number of layers of graphene. Also, if the time for the

annealing process is lengthened, the percentage of two and three monolayers is increased

dramatically, but the continuity and uniformity of the graphene are also enhanced significantly.

Moreover, the temperature and purity of the copper substrate affect the quality of graphene

grown using the CVD process. The higher the temperature used to grow graphene, the faster

the growth of graphene and the greater the number of layers produced. The purity of the

copper plays a significant role in growing continuous, un-oxidized, and uniform graphene layers.

Finally, the vacuum and the input of the precursor gases are very important to control in the

process of the growth of graphene. Under a higher vacuum, the flowing of the gases is more

uniform and controllable than under low vacuum; a higher vacuum thus results in higher quality

33

Page 49: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

of monolayer graphene. Leaks in the system lead to flow of ambient air, which oxidizes the

copper surface, and that will result in the growth of graphene oxide or in preventing the growth

of graphene.

Growth of graphene by CVD can be accomplished on many different substrate metals,

such as nickel, ruthenium, and iridium, and some researchers have used cobalt. However, the

most commonly used substrates for the growth of graphene are copper and nickel due to the

cost effectiveness and ease of handling of these metals. The most significant difference

between growing graphene on copper and on other substrates is the number of layers of

graphene that can be grown based on the amount of carbon the substrates can dissolve. Nickel,

for example, dissolves a greater amount of carbon than copper, which is self-limited. Using

nickel, between five to hundreds of graphene layers can be grown while the use of copper will

produce between one and ten layers maximum [6-9]. It is important to mention here that 90-

95% of graphene grown on copper will form 1-3 monolayers and the rest will form 3-10

monolayers. The differentiation between these numbers of layers will be related to the use of

different techniques in next section. Also, different substrates will have different defects and

wrinkle problems.

34

Page 50: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

In order to grow a large area of graphene, a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) system was

recently built in Dr. Oliver Chyan’s lab at the University of North Texas (Figure2.2). Using the CVD

machine makes it possible to grow graphene on any substrate with very high quality. Copper

(Cu) is one of the best substrates for the growth of graphene because of its self-limited carbon

solubility, which is limited to the formation of one to three monolayers of graphene in 95% of

the area. In our experiments, 25 micron thick copper foil was used with a purity of 99.98% as

the metal substrate for the production of graphene. Moreover, Cu is easy to remove using the

wet enchant to obtain a large pure graphene sheet ready to use in any test or application.

In general, ultra-high purity gases such as hydrogen, argon, and methane are used in the

synthesis of graphene. The process begins with the removal of the air using a rough pump the

insertion of argon gas, and then hydrogen is permitted to enter to clean the surface and initiate

Figure 2.2: The chemical vapor deposition (CVD) graphene system in our lab.

35

Page 51: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

the synthesis of graphene. Finally, a source of carbon, methane in our case, is allowed into the

chamber to dissolve on the copper and form graphene, while the hydrogen gas is kept running

to avoid any oxidation on the surface. The process of growing graphene is shown in figure 2.3.

Figure 2.3: Diagram of the graphene growth process.

2.2.1 Growth of Graphene on Copper Substrate

After the copper foil is inserted in the furnace chamber, the chamber is closed and

vacuumed to about 20mTorr. Argon is then inserted at a pressure of 450mTorr, and the furnace

is heated to 850°C to allow the copper to anneal. Then the flow of argon is stopped and

hydrogen is inserted to the pressure of 220mTorr for 50 min while the temperature is raised to

950oC. The hydrogen used in this step plays a critical role in reducing the surface and preparing

it for the growth of graphene. Then, methane was flowed simultaneously with hydrogen at the

same temperature for more 30min. Here it is important to mention that the total pressure

during the process of growing graphene should be less than 500mTorr. That will give graphene

of higher quality and better continuity.

36

Page 52: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

The number of monolayers that are obtained depends on how long methane gas is used

and the speed of the cooling of the system. After 30 min have passed, the flow of methane gas

is stopped without the turning off of the hydrogen gas, the furnace heating system is then

turned off, and the door is opened to allow graphene to form on the copper surface. A fan can

be used to accelerate the process of cooling to limit the percentage of multilayers that will form.

When the temperature reaches 40°C, the pumping stops and argon is inserted to raise the

pressure to around to the atmospheric pressure. After the flow of argon is stopped, the copper

with graphene on top is removed and kept under vacuum until it is used for the experiments

[10].

a b

Figure 2.4: a) Photo of copper foil before graphene growth b) Photo of copper foil after graphene growth.

2.3 Transfer of CVD Graphene

After the synthesis of the graphene on a metal substrate, transference to a different

substrate is necessary for the operation of some experiments. The process of transferring

graphene depends on the metal or non-metal on which the graphene has been grown. For

copper and nickel, the procedure of the transference is as demonstrated in figure 2.5, with

37

Page 53: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

slight differences as will be described later.

First, a surface is cast with a polymer such as poly methyl methacrylate (PMMA) to hold

up the graphene sheet during the copper corrosion. Then the copper substrate is corroded with

a solution of iron (III) nitrate Fe (NO3)3 or ferric chloride FeCl3. After the metal is corroded, the

resulting PMMA/ graphene is fished and cleaned using deionized water. Then the PMMA/

graphene is transferred to any other substrate which is desirable, a step which is followed by the

adding of drops of PMMA onto the PMMA/graphene/substrate to re-dissolve the first PMMA

and make graphene relax and lie flat.

Finally, the PMMA/graphene/substrate is dipped in acetone to dissolve the PMMA,

which results in graphene having been transferred to the new substrate successfully. It has been

Cu foil

Graphene

Step 8

Step 7

Step 6

Step 5

Step 4

Step 3

Step 2

Step 1

Figure 2.5: The process of transfer of CVD graphene to another substrate.

38

Page 54: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

noticed that the use of acetone alone will not remove all PMMA; therefore, some researchers

have discovered that treating the transferred graphene with hydrogen under vacuum and low

heat can remove the residual PMMA [7].

2.3.1 The Procedure of Transferring Graphene Grown on Copper

The desired size of Graphene/Cu is cut, and, if it is not flat, it is placed between two pre-

cleaned and fresh cover slides to make it flat. It is important to avoid any dust on the cover glass

that might create holes in the graphene sheet after transfer. Then 2% of PMMA polymer

dissolved in Anisole solvent is used to drop-cast the graphene on the copper substrate. Next,

the PMMA/Graphene/Cu is flipped over on a clean Kim wipe tissue and left there for 20sec. This

allows the PMMA to spread only on the front/graphene side; simultaneously, the excess PMMA

will be absorbed by the underlying Kim wipe tissue paper. The PMMA/Graphene/Cu is air dried

for 20 minutes or under pumping using a water aspirator to speed up the PMMA drying. Then it

is placed in 1M Fe (NO3)3 to etch the Cu. This step will take about 45-60 min; however, it is

better to leave it for at least 2 hr to make sure all the copper is etched. The color of the Fe

(NO3)3 shouldn’t turn to green; if it does, then it should be disposed of, and use fresh solution

should be used. After that, the PMMA/graphene is transferred with a wet cover glass by

inserting the glass slide 30-45 degrees into the etching solution to catch the PMMA/graphene

slowly (in order to avoid big wrinkles), then the PMMA/graphene is transferred into a clean DI

water-petri dish. This step is repeated using another clean DI water petri dish to make sure the

graphene is clean of the etching solution. One of the best adhesion substrates to which

graphene can be transferred is 300 nm SiO2/Si. Pre-cleaning of the substrate, which includes

sonication in acetone, blow drying, and ensuring that there are no dust particles, should be

39

Page 55: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

performed. Then the graphene is transferred to the SiO2 with a compressed air gun; this should

be directed straight down on the center of the PMMA/graphene, and the water should be

blown away. Some wrinkles may be observed on the PMMA/Graphene surface, but the

wrinkles may disappear gradually when it is dry. It is important to mention that extended

immersion in water could lead to the loss of graphene as water seeps in between the graphene

and the substrate. After the drying, a few drops of PMMA are added and left for 5 minutes; then

the graphene and substrate are spun to accomplish the removal of excess PMMA. This will help

to relax the graphene sheet and remove the wrinkles. Then the graphene and substrate are

dipped in acetone and shaken for 30 minutes. The graphene and substrate are spray cleaned

with acetone, then air dried; they are then placed back into the acetone and dried again.

Samples are kept in a desecrator for Raman analysis and test experiments. For additional

cleaning and to ensure that all PMMA was removed, the graphene transferred to substrate is

put in a vacuum with flowing hydrogen gas at 400oC for 20 min [11].

2.3.2 The Procedure of Transferring Graphene Grown on Nickel

Most of the steps for transferring graphene grown on nickel are the same as with copper

if 1-10 monolayers have been grown. However, if more than one hundred layers have been

grown, there is no need to use PMMA to hold the graphene layer while the nickel is being

etched; it can be transferred without the polymer. Also, another difference between copper and

nickel is that copper will etch and dissolve completely while nickel will separate from the

graphene and precipitate on the bottom of the beaker.

Transferring of graphene has been successfully done on different kinds of substrates

40

Page 56: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

using this method. Graphene was transferred from Cu to ruthenium (Ru) wafer, Ru quartz crystal

microbalance (QCM), attenuated total reflectance (ATR) Si crystal, and SiO2 wafer. After these

transferals are complete, several experiments can be accomplished such as hydrogenation,

electrodepositing, and detection of gases.

2.4 Characterization of Graphene on Different Substrates, Raman Spectroscopy, Water Contact

Angle Measurements, and QCM Frequency

Various techniques were used for graphene characterization before and after the

transferring process, such as Raman spectroscopy, the difference in the frequency of QCM, and

water contact angle measurement. It has been found that the water contact angle of the

graphene sheet is about 95o, which is consistent with what has been reported previously in the

literature [12].

Figure 2.6: Water contact angle measurement.

The quality and presence of a graphene layer on SiO2 substrate can be checked by

optical contrast and verified by Raman spectroscopy. Figure 2.7 shows Raman spectra done

before transfer of graphene to SiO2 and after transfer. The results from Raman spectroscopy

41

Page 57: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

were also consistent with reports in the literature [13] (Figure 2.8). The new way to check the

transferring process employed in this study is to use the difference of the frequency in the QCM

before and after transferring. After that, the Sauerbrey equation, which accounts for the

relationship between the mass change and the frequency change of a thickness-shear mode

quartz crystal, can be employed [14].

Figure 2.7: Raman spectra of graphene on Cu and graphene on 300 nm SiO2, developed in our lab.

42

Page 58: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 2.8: Raman spectra differences between graphene and graphite [13].

Raman analysis can give important information about the quality and number of

graphene layers grown or transferred. The two distinguishing bands for graphene are the 2D

band ~2700cm-1 and the G band ~ 1600cm-1. Other bands, such as the D band ~ 1350cm-1 and

(D+D’) band ~ 2850cm-1, can be useful to detect defects in graphene [4]. To determine the

number of monolayers of graphene and the defects in the Raman analysis, the G band and 2d

band ratio is calculated. If the intensity ratio is ca. 0.5, one monolayer of graphene was formed.

A ~1 G/2D intensity indicates about 2 to 3 monolayers of graphene. The higher the G band the

greater the number of layers of graphene formed; also, it is an indication of defects in the

graphene growth [4].

43

Page 59: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

2.4.1 Detection of Graphene Monolayers Using QCM

The QCM technique has advantages in the measurement of the mass change during the

deposition and stripping as well as of the charge change. Through comparison of these variables

it the same time, rich information was obtained regarding the side reactions or deposition.

Moreover, the QCM technique is very sensitive to any change on the surface of the surrounding

conditions which is of interest for exploration. Calculation of the mass change using the

Sauerbray equation [14], which accounts for the relationship between the mass change and the

frequency change, reveals much information about what is happening on the surface, and that

can be translated into the number of monolayers as well as the mechanism and kinetics of the

reaction if this is required. The sensitivity of the QCM technique is very high. It can detect the

change of sub-monolayer or mass change on the surface. The sensitivity of the QCM technique

used for this study is ca. 0.708ng of the change of 1Hz.

The Sauerbrey equation shows the linear relationship between the mass change and the

corresponding change in vibration frequency. The frequency of the Ru QCM is taken within the

stabilized 1Hz frequency, which can be identified by means of changing of the frequency within

100 sec, before transfer of graphene. After that, the graphene is transferred to the Ru QCM and

is dried for a couple of hours. The frequency of the Ru QCM which has graphene on it is

measured again. Then the number of monolayers of graphene is calculated using the Sauerbrey

equation. It has been found based on the area of the QCM that ~100Hz difference before and

44

Page 60: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

after the transfer of graphene to QCM will indicate 1 monolayer of graphene (see Figure 2.9).

Furthermore, Raman analysis was used to verify that graphene was transferred to QCM. Ru and

Au QCM were used to transfer graphene and measure the number of layers. The number of

monolayers was calculated to be ca. 1.2 ML for the graphene transferred to Ru QCM. This

indicates that high quality graphene was grown, and to confirm that finding, Raman analysis

was carried out and indeed gave the same result. From these experiments of transferring

graphene to metal QCM, it was discovered that the adhesion of graphene is metal sensitive.

Other metal QCM was tried, such as that of Cu, but graphene did not adhere to the surface.

Figure 2.9: a) Shows the frequency of the QCM before the transfer of graphene. b) Shows the frequency after the transfer of graphene.

Through the use of this technique, a new method was employed to determine the

b

a

45

Page 61: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

number of graphene monolayers and the quality of transference in addition to the other

methods which were mentioned earlier. In addition, the process of cleaning can be monitored,

and its efficiency can be detected. The next step is to use the same technique to perform the

test and detect any changes in the electrodepositing and charge transferring of metal

deposition or other reactions occurring on the surface of the graphene.

2.4.2 Detection Graphene Using AFM

Atomic force microscopy can also be performed on graphene that has been transferred

to a flat rigid substrate in order to directly measure the thickness and thus the number of layers

of the graphene. The flatness of the graphene surface area can be tested using the atomic force

microscope (AFM) [15]. AFM images can reveal the quality of the graphene sheet transferred to

substrate and the flatness of the graphene surface area. The ultra-flatness of graphene on mica

substrate is reported with height variations ca. 0.25Ao [15]. The flatness of graphene on SiO2 is

about 1.3nm as reported by Shen et al. [16] Atomic force microscope (AFM) can be used to

measure the uniformity of the deposition and surface roughness.

a b

Figure 2.10: a) Reported AFM image of a boundary between a graphene monolayer and a SiO2 substrate. b) Reported AFM image of a boundary between a graphene monolayer and a mica substrate [15].

46

Page 62: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

2.5 Graphene Plasma Hydrogenation (Graphane) and Characterization by FTIR

According to Diankov opening the band gap energy of graphene will have more

significant applications especially in the semiconductor industry [17]. There are many

approaches to achieving the gap opening such as depositing graphene on lower dielectric or

functionalizing graphene with a different functional group. Hydrogenation of graphene is one of

these ways to open the band gap to a level which will be useful for many applications related to

semiconductors. Different ways can be used to hydrogenate graphene; one of them is to use

hydrogen plasma. There are two types of hydrogen plasma which can be used, DC and RF, and

there are several differences between them in the way they hydrogenate graphene, the rate,

and the preferential number of monolayers [18]. For example, DC plasma hydrogenation has a

low rate of hydrogenation with preference for monolayers of graphene, while RF plasma has a

high rate of hydrogenation with preference for multilayers [19, 20].

Raman analysis and AFM were used to characterize and demonstrate the hydrogenation

of graphene; however, someone might argue that the change on the Raman spectra or even on

the AFM image might come from the hydrogenation of graphene or from a defect of the

graphene surface. By means of using the FTIR in our lab, the olefinic C-H stretch peak which

corresponds to the hydrogenation of graphene, can be detected as can be seen in figure 2.11.

Moreover, in the case of MIR-IR, the orientation of the hydrogenation on the graphene can lead

to understanding and predicting the structure of the graphane.

The observed result in the hydrogenation of our CVD graphene which is transferred to an

ATR crystal is single side hydrogenation, until it reaches the maximum of the hydrogenation.

Then it starts to hydrogenate the other side, which changes the conformation structure to a

47

Page 63: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

chair structure, and the graphane pops up and breaks from the surface. This is the reason why it

reaches maximum on hydrogenation and then the intensity starts to go down again.

Figure 2.11: FT-IR spectra of hydrogenation of graphene and loss after 45 min.

The time required for this process to happen depends on the sample size, the

hydrogenation rate, and the parameters which are used to achieve the hydrogenation. To avoid

this problem, a free standing graphene sheet can be tested to see if it is observed to have the

same problem. In this experiment, two mode of FTIR were used, the transmission (TR-IT) and

the multiple internal reflections (MIR-IR).

48

Page 64: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 2.12: Anticipated graphene hydrogenation structure in which certain spots show vacancies between the carbons of graphene and not all the carbon is covered [21].

Surprisingly, at the beginning the C-H stretch peak can be seen using transmission infra-

red (TR-IR) more clearly than the multiple internal reflection infra-red (MIR-IR). That can be

explained by the fact that the technique using MIR-IR is an angle-dependent technique, so

depending on the angle at which the surface is hit, it will collect the information of that angle

on the surface, and because the hydrogenation of the graphene must be oriented to a certain

angle every time, it is necessary to choose the right angle in order to detect the hydrogenation.

However, the transmission detects the changes in all the angles; that is why the C-H stretching

was seen at the beginning using this technique with a height of 0.18 milli absorbance(mAU)

after 45 min plasma hydrogenation (see figure 2.13). According to Lord, the C-H stretch is

sensitive to the ring size and the position of 3017cm-1 refers to a six-member ring. Also, the

49

Page 65: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

position of this vibration is effective for unsaturated compounds [22].

Figure 2.13: Differential FT-IR spectra of hydrogenated graphene using H2 plasma.

It is important to mention that MIR-IR is more sensitive and specific to this region. The

next step was to use the MIR-IR with the polarizer so that the angle at which the light hit the

surface could be varied from 0-180o. It has been found that the best angle polarization is

between 40-60o, which results in higher intensity; again, the peak shows at the same position,

3017cm-1, which confirms that it is the right position of the C-H olefinic vibration. Therefore, it

can be concluded from these experiments that the hydrogenation of graphene is oriented; it is

embedded with an angle to the graphene surface. Some researchers have mentioned that the

hydrogenation of graphene may be one of the best ways to control the band gap opening of

graphene, which will make it compatible with semiconductors applications. Moreover, different

hydrogenation sites and close structures will give different band gaps, which is of interest for

controlling the band gap opening so it can be directed to different applications (see Figures 2.14

Transfer graphene 0.07mAU

25min 0.09mAU

45min 0.18mAU

C-H Olefinic

3017cm-1

50

Page 66: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

and 2.15) [23].

In the process of graphene hydrogenation, the RF plasma chamber was used with low

pressure up to 0.1 bar with 30 watts. The hydrogenation with time was studied from 5 sec to ca.

H

H

H

H

Figure 2.14: Graphene hydrogenation. In this case, there is one carbon atom separating the 2 H atoms [23].

Figure 2.15: Graphene hydrogenation. In this case, the 2 H atoms are separated by multiple carbon atoms, which classifies it as the “Far” structure [23].

51

Page 67: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

2hr. The use of these conditions revealed the maximum hydrogenation to be at about 40-60

min. After the 60 min, if it continued, the intensity of the C-H vibration signal would start to

decrease, which means that some of the graphane somehow changed. Future work is required

to explain why this phenomena occurs.

It is interesting to mention that not only can H2 gas hydrogenate graphene, but also the

residue of H2O in the chamber or adsorb on the surface can cause the hydrogenation. According

to Jones, the H2O molecules in the plasma chamber split to H- and H radical, which can do the

work of the hydrogenation. Also, he mention that the vacuum is not sufficient to remove all the

water molecules [24, 25].

Another experiment which was employed to explore the qualities of the graphene

produced was to perform hydrogenation of the graphene transferred to ATR crystal and then to

sputter a few spot with Cu using mask dots ~2nm. It is well known that the use of metal with

graphene enhances the adsorption of the gases, which increases the probability of

hydrogenation of the graphene [26]. As can be seen in figure 2.16, the peak of the C-H olefinic

shows up clearly after 10 min of plasma hydrogenation.

52

Page 68: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

This experiment shows better hydrogenation and a sharper peak using the MIR-IR

polarizer at 45o because the edge of the graphene might be increased around the Cu atoms; it

could also be that the metal itself works as a catalyst to increase the hydrogenation process.

Moreover, the constancy of occurrence at the same position of C-H olefinic, at 3017cm-1, proves

that that is the right location for graphene hydrogenation. This is a special signature for the

graphene properties, confirmed in the literature for C-H olefinic in a six member ring; this

proves that the graphene was partially hydrogenated [27].

The intensity of the C-H vibration increases from 0.2 milli absorbance (mAU) to 0.8 mAU.

The initial 0.2 mAU comes from the edge graphene termination hydrogenation after the process

of transfer, and the rest of the increase is due to the plasma hydrogenation. There is not much

increase between 10 min and 45 min, but there is a significant difference in that it is easier

Figure 2.16: MIR-IR spectra of graphene with a few atoms of Cu sputtered; plasma hydrogenation was detected using MR-IR for 45 degree polarization.

53

Page 69: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

initially to hydrogenate the surface when all the sites are open, but it becomes more difficult

after that. This could provide an explanation for the loss of intensity after continuation of the

plasma hydrogenation because there could be competition with the graphane which has

already hydrogenated; some of this might be removed as hydrogenation occurs again, which

might cause damage to the surface.

Raman analysis also was used to detect the hydrogenation of graphene and to

determine what had happened on the surface. The result of the Raman analysis confirmed that

hydrogenation of the graphene was present based on the change of the intensity and the

appearance of the D at (~1350cm-1), D’ at (~1620cm-1) and D+D’ at (~2890cm-1) peaks, as is

shown in figure 2.17. The fact that D’ and D+D’ show in the Raman analysis proves that the

graphene is hydrogenated, a result which is consistent with the literature [28]. These

experiments, also, have been repeated and confirmed by the collaboration of Dr. Wonbong

Choi’s group from the Materials Science and Engineering Department at UNT.

54

Page 70: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 2.17: Raman spectra of graphene before and after plasma hydrogenation.

2.6 Adsorption of Carbon Monoxide (CO) on the Graphene Surface

Graphene gas sensors have received a lot of attention for the fact that they can detect as

little as one molecule or atom. Several theoretical studies have explored the effectiveness and

performance of pristine and embedded metals graphene in detecting gas molecules such as

NH3, NO2, CO, CO2, and O2. In general, the embedded graphene is more sensitive and stable

than non-embedded graphene. High performance gas sensor graphene based catalysts and the

adsorption/ desorption mechanism have been investigated by many researchers [26, 29]. The

adsorption/ desorption properties of graphene were studied using our QCM system to explore

the efficiency of graphene in detecting and adsorbing gases; in our case, carbon monoxide (CO)

55

Page 71: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

was used. A graphene layer was transferred to Ru QCM and hooked inside the dissector, which

was pumped and filled with N2 first and then with the CO the second time. The pressure inside

the dissector was left at atmospheric pressure, and the dissector was closed. Use of the QCM

technique to measure the frequency after a period of time will determine how much CO

adsorbs on the surface of the graphene. Our experiment shows that the adsorption of CO on

pristine graphene surface is easily shaken off, which indicates that the interaction is a very weak

van der Waals interaction. That was concluded because after the QCM had vibrated for few

minutes, the frequency reading returned to the same reading from before the CO adsorption

and stabilized. In other words, the vibration of the QCM shakes off the adsorption layer of CO as

can be seen in Figure 2.18. From the differences in the frequency, the number of monolayers

can be calculated. The coverage of the CO on the pristine graphene was found to be ca. 0.5

monolayer.

Figure 2.18: The adsorption of CO on pristine graphene transferred to Ru QCM.

56

Page 72: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

It is reported in the literature that embedded metal graphene works better for

adsorption of gases. There are several theoretical studies which address adsorption of NH3 and

CO on pristine and embedded graphene, and they explain the locations and the strength of the

bond. According to Zhou, the stable adsorption site for CO on pristine graphene is at the hollow

(H) site [26].

Figure 2.19: Schematic view of a single gas molecule (NH3) adsorption on pristine graphene (a) TM–graphene (b). T, top site; B, bridge site; H, hollow site; M, transition metal atom (Au). Carbon atom in gray, H in white, N in blue and Au atom in yellow [26].

The next experiment on detection of CO gas was to investigate the adsorption of CO gas

on the embedded graphene with Cu metals. A few atoms of Cu ca. 5nm, which were not

sufficient to cover all the graphene spots, were sputtered on the surface, and the same

experiment of the adsorption of CO was repeated.

57

Page 73: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 2.20: The adsorption of CO on graphene transferred to Ru QCM embedded with 5nm Cu.

The results show that the adsorption of CO on graphene embedded with Cu is stronger.

Some of the CO shakes off after vibration, corresponding to the sites of pristine graphene, and

some are held, as is shown in Figure 2.20. The frequency of the QCM did not return to the same

reading from before the adsorption of CO this time, which indicates that some of the CO was

retained on the surface. The percentage of the retained CO was ~68% and 32% was shaken off.

Future experiments should be conducted to investigate the adsorption under different

conditions, i.e., with different temperature, pressure, and gases. Two QCMs were tested, one

with graphene and one without, to see if they would show the same CO adsorption as in the

conditions of the open lab, and the result did not show the same trend.

2.7 Electrochemical Properties of Graphene

The electrochemical properties of graphene were also explored. The differences

58

Page 74: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

between the Ru, glassy carbon (GC), and graphene were investigated. As shown in Figure 2.21,

there is a difference between the Ru cyclic voltammetry (CV) and the CV of the graphene

electrode. Moreover, the CV of graphene is more similar to that of the glassy carbon electrode

as appears in the figure 2.22.

Figure 2.21: Comparison of the CVs between the Ru electrode and Graphene on the Ru wafer electrode.

59

Page 75: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Also, the interactions between graphene and the simple redox molecule

hexacyanoferrate (III) were explored; the results are shown in figure 2.23. Cyclic voltammetric

measurements were used to characterize and find the differences between graphene and

different substrates. Moreover, the difference between the Cu substrate on which graphene was

grown and glassy carbon (GC), which is expected to behave similarly to graphene, was tested.

Observation of these CVs shows that there is a significant difference between them, and that, as

expected, graphene transferred to SiO2 behaves in a way more similar to GC. That also proves

that our transferred graphene is clean, continuous, and uniform.

Figure 2.22: Comparison of the CVs between the GC electrode and graphene on the Ru wafer electrode.

60

Page 76: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

2.7.1 Electrodepositing of Cu on Graphene

Currently, the combination of nanomaterials on electrodes as a catalyst to improve

electrochemical sensors is very common due to the resulting excellent conductivity, high surface

area, and better catalytic activity. For example, Ag nanoparticles (Ag NPs) electrocatalytic

materials are employed for a reduction of H2O2, and Pt nanoparticles (Pt NPs) electrocatalytic

materials are used to reduce the H2O2 [30]. These nanomaterials can be used as electrode

materials or as catalytic labels for improved electrochemical detection [31]. Also, they can be

combined with thermo-sensitive polymers to develop a thermo electrocatalytic process [32].

Using graphene as a platform, a smooth large area of deposition is provided, with small NPs of

metals which will enhance the electrochemical and electroactivity properties [33]. Other

platforms require a preparation process before they are used, such as polishing or

electrochemical cleaning, but the use of graphene requires no polishing or electrochemical

GC elect.

Graphene on the SiO2 elect.

Copper foil elect.

Graphene foil elect.

Figure 2.23: CVs for Cu foil, graphene, and GC electrodes in hexacyanoferrate (III).

61

Page 77: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

cleaning, which makes graphene one of the best candidates for this kind of application.

Figure 2.24: a) Graphene on Ru wafer before electroplating with 2mMCu. b) Graphene on Ru wafer after electroplating with 2mMCu.

After the initial determination of the characteristics of the electrochemistry of the

graphene, the deposition of Cu on the graphene surface was explored. As can be seen in Figure

2.24, the deposition of Cu on graphene occurs when the potential on the -0.2V vs. Ag/AgCl is

held for about 30 min [34]. This was the first step needed to prove that Cu can indeed be

deposited on a graphene sheet. The next step was to observe whether the deposition and

striping can occur without damage to the surface of graphene. Observation by means of a

microscope reveals little difference before and after; however, Raman analysis is needed to

confirm that damage has not occurred to the surface. Moreover, measuring of the open circuit

potential (OCP) shows that the reading is the same after Cu is stripped from the graphene

sheet. This suggests that decorating graphene with Cu particles may be advantageous for use in

many applications; however, additional investigation employing other metals needs to be done.

a b a

62

Page 78: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

2.8 References

1. Yoo, E. J.; Kim, J.; Hosono, E.; Zhou, H. S.; Kudo, T.; Honma, I. Nano Lett. 2008, 8, 2277–

2282.

2. Abraham, K. M, Jiang, Z. J. Electrochem Soc. 1996, 143, 1-5.

3. Shimonishi, A.; Zhang, T.; Johnson, P.; Imanishi, N.; Hirano, A.; Takeda, Y.; Yamamoto, O.;

Sammes, N. J. Power Sources, 2011, 196, 5128-513.

4. Li, X. S.; Cai, W. W.; An, J. H.; Kim, S.; Nah, J.; Yang, D. X.; Piner, R. D.; Velamakanni, A.; Jung,

I.; Tutuc, E.; Banerjee, S. K.; Colombo, L.; Ruoff, R. S. Science 2009, 324, 1312–1314

5. Li, X.; Zhu, Y.; Cai, W.; Borysiak, M.; Han, B.; Chen, D.; Piner, R.; Colombo, L.; Ruoff, R. Nano

Lett. 2009, 9, 12.

6. Yu, Q. et al., Graphene segregated on Ni surfaces and transferred to insulators. Appl. Phys.

Lett. 2008, 93, 113103.

7. Pham, P.; Zande, A.; Xu, X.; McEuen, P. Chemical vapor deposition growth of graphene,

2009. Cornell CNS REU Presentation

8. Li, X.; Cai, W.; Colombo, L.; Ruoff, R. Nano Lett. 2009, 9, 12.

9. Kim, K.; Zhao, Y.; Jang, H.; Lee, S.; Kim, J.; Kim, K. S.; Ahn, J.; Kim, P.; Choi, J.; Hong, B. Nature

2009, 457.

10. Zande, A.; McEuen, P. Graphene fabrication, mceuen group wiki.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=Graphene+fabrication,+mceuen+group&start=271&sa=

X&biw=1280&bih=921&tbm=isch&tbnid=Ng_cmLH5wKuaxM:&imgrefurl=http://central.oak

.go.kr/search/detailarticle.jsp%3Farticle_seq%3D10989%26tabname%3Dabst%26resource_

seq%3Dnull%26keywords%3Dnull&docid=vASW9_NGWjOChM&imgurl=http://central.oak.g

63

Page 79: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

o.kr/repository/journal/10989/HGTSB6_2012_v13n1_1_f007.jpg&w=689&h=534&ei=hIl6U

a6oOK-

34AOD8oCwBA&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:81,s:200,i:247&iact=rc&dur=736&page=11&tbnh

=176&tbnw=223&ndsp=26&tx=99&ty=86.

11. Lu, J.; Drzal, L.T.; Worden, R.M.; Lee, I. Chemistry of Materials. 2007, 19, 6240.

12. Lu, Y. C.; Gasteiger, H. A.; Crumlin, E.; McGuire, R.; Shao- Horn, Y. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2010,

157, A1016.

13. A. C. Ferrari, J. C. Meyer, V. Scardaci, C. Casiraghi M. Lazzeri F. Mauri S. Piscanec D. Jiang K.

S. Novoselov S. Roth, and A. K. Geim, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, 2006, 97, 187401.

14. Sauerbrey, G. Zeitschrift für Physik. 1959, 155.

15. Lui, H. C.; Lui, L; Mak, K. F.; Flynn, G.; Heinz, T. Nature 2010, 462, 339-341.

16. Shen, J.; Hu, Y.; Shi, M.; Lu, X.; Qin, C.; Li, C.; Ye, M. Chem. Mater. 2009, 21, 3514-3520.

17. Diankov, G.; Neumann, M.; Goldhaber-Gordon, D. ACSNANO, 2013.

18. Young J.S.; Yingying, W.; Han, H.; Gopinadhan, K.; Andrew, T.S.; Zexiang, S.; Charanjit, S. B.;

Hyunsoo, Y. Langmuir. 2010, 26, 3798–3802.

19. Luo, Z.; Yu, T.; Kim, K.-J.; Ni, Z.; You, Y.; Lim, S.; Shen, Z.; Wang, S.; Lin, J. ACS Nano 2009, 3,

1781– 1788.

20. Yang, R.; Zhang, L.; Wang, Y.; Shi, Z.; Shi, D.; Gao, H.; Wang, E.; Zhang, G. Adv. Mater. 2010,

22, 4014–4019.

21. http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1171631

22. Lord, R. C.; Miller, F. A. Applied Spectroscopy 1956, 10, 115-123.

23. McNelles, P. PhD. Dissertation, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2011.

64

Page 80: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

24. Jones, J.D.; Hoffmann, W.D.; Jesseph, A.V.; Morris, C.J.; Verbeck, G.F.; Perez, J.M.

Applied Physics Letters 2010, 97, 233104.

25. Jones, J.D.; Morris, C.J.; Verbeck, G.F.; Perez, J.M. Applied Surface Science 2013, 264, 853–

863.

26. Zhou, M.; Lu, Y.; Cai, Y.; Zhang, C.; Feng, Y. Nanotechnology 2011, 22, 385502.

27. Colthup, N. B.; Daly, L. H. Introduction to Infrared and Raman Spectroscopy. 3rd ed.;

Stephen E. Wiberley, 1990.

28. Elias, D.; Nair, R.; Mohiuddin, T.; Morozov, S.; Blake, P.; Halsall, M.; Ferrari, M.; Boukhvalov,

W.; Katsnelson, M.; Geim, K.; Novoselov, K. Science 2009, 323.

29. Liu, C.; Jia, R.; Ye, X.; Zeng, Z. THE JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS 2013, 139, 034704.

30. Shi, Z.; Yang, R.; Zhang, L.; Wang, Y.; Liu, D.; Shi, D.; Wang, E.; Zhang, G. Adv. Mater. 2011,

23, 3061– 3065.

31. Liu, S.Q.; Tang, Z.Y. J. Mater. Chem. 2010, 20, 24.

32. M. Riskin, R. Tel-Vered, I. Willner, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2009, 19, 2474.

33. Li, J.; Guo, S.; Zhai, Y.; Wang, E. Electrochemistry Communications, 2009, 11, 1085-1088.

34. Song, Y.; He, Z.; Zhu, H.; Hou, H.; Wang, L. Electrochimica Acta. 2011, 58, 757– 763.

65

Page 81: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

CHAPTER 3

BISMUTH (Bi) UNDERPOTENTIAL DEPOSITION (UPD) ON RUTHENIUM (Ru)

3.1 Introduction

Underpotential deposition is a term that refers to electrochemical deposition of a single

layer or monolayer of atoms, usually metals, on a substrate with positive potential for bulk

deposition. The underpotential deposition (UPD) of this monolayer on the substrate can bring

about significant changes in the catalytic properties of the substrate, which is usually another

metal. The UPD phenomenon has been the subject of a large number of studies over the last

two decades. The UPD process, in general, requires a bi-metallic catalytic surface design for a

new catalyst. These new surfaces will have different characteristics from either the substrates or

the deposited metals, and this will result in the possibility of new applications for these

catalysts. Even though the UPD is supposed to result in one monolayer deposited on the surface

of the substrate, this is not the case for all metals. Some of them could have more than one and

others could have less than one monolayer depending on different conditions and parameters

such as the size or the morphology of the metals deposited.

There are different kinds of UPD, reversible, quasi-reversible, and irreversible,

depending on the characteristic of the metals. Most of the new UPD has unique properties that

are not predictable on the basis of the metal, substrate, and other UPD metals; therefore, it is

necessary to study and investigate the structure and the characteristics of these new UPDs and

explore the catalytic behavior under different conditions. This will reveal important information

regarding how the deposition occurs. Electrochemical quartz crystal microbalance (EQCM) is a

very sensitive technique in which the difference in the mass, simultaneous with the change of

66

Page 82: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

the charge, can be measured. Monitoring the differences in both mass and charge transfer on

the surface leads to a profound understanding of the result [1].

In previous work, one of our members (Lin, Po-Fu) had investigated the features of Bi

underpotential deposition on Ru and analyzed the differences of the deposition under different

substrate conditions like Ru and RuOx [2]. The interesting part of this work was that when the

EQCM was used to do the deposition and calculate the number of monolayers (ML) of the UPD

of Bi on Ru, a discrepancy was found between the number of monolayers calculated on the

mass basis and the number of monolayers calculated on the charge basis [2]. This situation

indicates that the extra monolayers based on the calculation of charge as compared to that of

mass could imply the involvement of other parameters or reactions. To provide a clear picture

regarding this discrepancy, the influences of anions and the ambient effect were investigated.

The exploration of these influences was carried out using a variety of techniques such as EQCM,

XPS, and RRDE, as will be explained in detail later.

E-chem experiments were completed under the same conditions with variability of

certain parameters. The three-electrode system was used to study Bi UPD on Ru. Ru QCM and

wafers were employed as working electrodes (WE), platinum (Pt) wire was used as counter

electrodes (CE), and mercury mercurous sulfate Hg/Hg2SO4 was used as the reference electrode

(RE). XPS analysis procedures were accomplished using the PHI 5000 VersaprobeTM instrument.

The high energy monochromatic x-ray source kα-Al at 1486.6eV was employed as the source of

the x-ray. 123eV was selected for the survey energy pass, and the high resolution energy pass

was at 23.5eV. The Ar sputtering rate was 5Å/min based on the SiO2 removal calibration.

67

Page 83: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

3.2 The Effect of the Ambient on Bismuth under Potential Deposition (UPD) on Ruthenium

Different ambient were investigated in this chapter to see the effect on the UPD as well

as the effect on the discrepancy. The lab ambient (air) was undertaken first, then nitrogen (N2)

was tested, and finally the effect of excess oxygen (O2) was explored. It is expected that the

ambient will have significant impacts in changing the number of ML due to the fact that there is

a discrepancy on the mass and charge calculation of the number of monolayers (ML).

As it can be seen in figure 3.1 there is different in the reduction current and oxidation

current in the UPD region and bulk region under N2 and O2. In the Bi UPD anodic scan the

reduction current increases within the potential region of [-0.47, 0.03], with the oxygen amount

increasing in the ambient above the test solution (0.5M H2SO4+ 1mMBi3+).

Figure 3.1: Ambient effect of Bi deposition on Ru. (a.) CV of Bi deposition on Ru. Scan rate of 5mV/s. (b.) Zoom-in view of CV in Bi UPD region. (c.) Mass response. (d.) Zoom-in view of mass

d

c

a

b

68

Page 84: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

response in Bi UPD region.

The Bi UPD oxidation current decreases to a point that the surface starts undergo

reduction reaction, which is evident by negative current in Bi UPD region. The mass response of

Bi UPD with N2 purge shows similar Bi MLMass coverage as the mass response without N2 purge.

This can be explained that the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) taking places in Bi UPD region

even in anodic scan. However, the mass response with O2 purge shows significantly higher Bi

MLMass coverage than the mass response with or without N2 purge. This drastically increases in

reduction current and mass response with O2 purge can be explained that the surface of Bi UPD

had undergone oxidation, probably Bi2O3, while large amount for ORR reduction current taking

places, making the anodic scan current become negative. Another explanation can be that

higher concentration of O2 facilitating the ORR reaction and making the surface of Bi UPD

become negatively charged, which attracts BiOH2+ or BiO+ from solution to Bi UPD surface,

making this large mass response.

Calculating the number of ML based in the charge and mass gave us different amount

from the scan rate range of 5-50 mV/s. ML coverage based in the mass calculation with different

scan rate did not show significant difference. Based on the reduction charge at scan rate

5mV/s, it goes from ca. 3 ML for nitrogen, to ca. 5 ML for lab ambient, and ca. 18 ML for oxygen

as shown in figure 3.2 which is indicating that the amount of O2 play an essential role in these

experiments. Figure 3.2 also shows that the difference between the numbers of ML based in

charge and mass in the scan rate 100mV/s and higher is not that significant.

69

Page 85: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

In the early stage of cathodic scan, ORR taking places on the fresh Ru surface before Bi

UPD take places. This explains the onset potential of reduction current is earlier than the onset

potential of mass response. As the cathodic scan reaches to Bi UPD region, mass started to

increase while ORR still take place. Soon after the completion of Bi UPD monolayer on Ru,

oxygen reduction reaction decreases. As the cathodic scan passed the Bi UPD region, Bi bulk

deposition take places. The mass response and current of Bi bulk deposition shows similar

amount of increase in Bi ML coverage indicates that electrons from the working electrode are

solely use to reduce Bi3+ to Bi on the surface. Notice that a slight difference in the Bi bulk

stripping coverage between the Bi MLMass and Bi MLCharge can be contributed to unpreventable

oxidation of Bi in solution. Once the CV stops at the Bi bulk region, the Bi is soon oxidized to

Bi2O3, which is then dissolved in acidic solution, releasing Bi3+ back to solution. During the

0 50 100 150 200 2500.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1.15

1.20

1.25

1.30

1.35

Bi U

PD M

L (fr

om M

Man

ual)

Scan Rate (mV/s)

Bi UPD ML (from MCathodic)(H2SO4)(N2 purge) Bi UPD ML (from MCathodic)(H2SO4)(no N2 purge) Bi UPD ML (from MCathodic)(H2SO4)(O2 purge)

0 50 100 150 200 250-10123456789

10111213141516171819

Bi U

PD M

L (fr

om Q

Man

ual B

asel

ine

Corre

cted

)

Scan Rate (mV/s)

Bi UPD ML (from QCathodic)(H2SO4)(N2 purge) Bi UPD ML (from QCathodic)(H2SO4)(no N2 purge) Bi UPD ML (from QCathodic)(H2SO4)(O2 purge)

b

a

Figure 3.2: (a.) Bi UPD MLMass (Cathodic) calculated in different scan rate, N2 purge (black line), lab ambient (red line), and O2 purge (Green line). b.) Bi UPD MLCharge (Cathodic) calculated in different scan rate, N2 purge (black line), lab ambient (red line), and O2 purge (Green line).

70

Page 86: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

anodic scan, the Bi bulk oxidized and dissolved rapidly until the Bi coverage reaches to

monolayer. When stopping CV near the end of the Bi bulk oxidizing region, the remaining Bi is

soon oxidized to Bi2O3, and then dissolved in acidic solution in the form of Bi3+[3]. When CV

scans to anodic region, a significant reduction current occurs while Bi UPD monolayer

undergoes oxidation. This reduction current is contributed to oxygen reduction reaction which

reduces the partial-exposed Ru surface while Bi UPD adatoms are oxidizing. This can be

explained that O2 purge makes Bi UPD monolayer harder to strip away from surface. Notice that

in Bi bulk region, there is no significant difference in Bi MLMass coverage between O2 purge and

N2 purge. This similarity in Bi MLMass coverage signifies the Bi bulk should be mainly Bi metal

instead of Bi2O3 or other Bi oxide species. In addition, Bi UPD ML in O2 purged solution shows

higher resistant to oxidation indicating that the ORR does take place. From the observation of

the very small change on the number of monolayers under the O2 ambient, it can be concluded

that ORR (which occur on the surface) prevents the oxidation of Bi layer and increases the mass.

This explanation also infers that ORR can take place at Bi UPD-modified Ru electrode surface

even with more than one Bi monolayer coverage such as 2.5 Bi MLcharge coverage or less.

A comparison of the ambient differences in the above sample evinces that with an

increase in the concentration of oxygen the Bi UPD MLCharge increases without effecting any

change in the MLMass (see figure 3.2). This is another evidence of additional electron transport

processes other than Bi UPD which occurs on Ru electrode. This significant increase of

reduction current in both cathodic and anodic scan during Bi UPD function indicates that it does

change the catalytic property of the Ru electrode. One possible explanation for this charge-

mass discrepancy is an evidence of possible ORR or formation of peroxide catalyzed by Bi UPD-

71

Page 87: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

modified Ru electrode. Notice that O2 purge does not change the Bi UPD MLMass drastically as

with air-saturated Bi UPD MLMass. This indicates that the Bi UPD in O2 purge and in air-saturated

ambient are likely to have the same chemical composition. In other words, Bi UPD in oxygen-

saturated and in air-saturated conditions are more likely to be Bi oxide or co-deposit of Bi and Bi

oxide instead of Bi adatoms. In contrast, if any oxides are forming during the processing of Bi

UPD in N2 purging conditions, it is more likely to form Bi adatoms and less Bi oxide. The ratio of

Bi oxide-to-Bi adatoms of Bi UPD on Ru is expect to be higher in O2-saturated and air-saturated

conditions than that in N2 purge condition.

3.3 Anion Effect on Bismuth under Potential Deposition (UPD) on Ruthenium

Wieckowski found that anion adsorption (e.g. HSO4- or SO4

2-) on the surface of Pt

electrode decreases the catalytic activity of Pt on ORR [4]. This experiment explores the effect

of anion adsorption on the catalytic property of Bi UPD-modified Ru electrode. To explore this

anion effect on Bi UPD, this study has undertaken a comparison between SO42- and ClO4

- [5].

While performing the experiment, the anodic bulk and UPD region is shifted slightly to the

positive region. This results in a weakening of the stronger absorbing SO42 and the prevailing of

the weaker absorbing ClO4- in the solution, as showing in figure 3.3

72

Page 88: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 3.3: Anion effect of Bi deposition on Ru. (a.) CV of Bi deposition on Ru. Scan rate of 5mV/s. (b.) Zoom-in view of CV in Bi UPD region. (c.) Mass response. (d.) Zoom-in view of mass response in Bi UPD region.

Furthermore, multiple LSV oxidation stripping shows that Bi UPD on Ru is more stable in

HClO4 than in H2SO4; in other words, Bi UPD on Ru in HClO4 is harder to strip away than in H2SO4

by electrochemical oxidation. One explanation of this shift can be the strong adsorption of Bi

with the OH- anion. Because prechlorate anion has lower tendency to adsorb on Bi as reported

while sulfate anion is adsorbed more strongly with Bi and compete with the hydroxium anion

[5]. To overcome the adsorbing anion more energy (ΔE) is needed in the OH- than SO42- which

means, OH- is stronger. Another justification is due the lack of adsorption of the anion on the

HClO4 anion, the Bi deposition is adhering stronger on the Ru. The ΔE difference between the

HClO4 is greater than H2SO4 by 14.5 kJ/mole. In one hand, under the same scan rate (5 mV/s),

73

Page 89: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

the Bi UPD MLMass coverage in H2SO4 (1.03 ML) is higher than Bi UPD MLMass coverage in HClO4

(0.37 ML). In the other hand, the Bi UPD MLCharge gives similar ML coverage in both H2SO4 (3.06

ML) and HClO4 (2.71 ML), as figure 3.4 present. One of the interpretations of these results is

because of the anion effects. For example, co- adsorption of SO42- with Bi UPD on Ru in H2SO4

gives higher Bi UPD MLMass coverage while ClO- is weakly adsorb on the Ru surface. In figure 3.3

the anion changing from SO42- to ClO4

- effect took place clearly in the striping of the Bi bulk and

Bi UPD under N2 purge. Nevertheless under other ambient the difference is not significant. This

finding can be justified by the fact that the lack of oxygen lower the oxygen reduction reaction

(ORR) and allow anion effect to take place. It was reported that sulfate anion adsorbed strongly

on the Pt surface to interfere with ORR. The same behavior of the sulfate anion on Ru is

expected and our experiment data support this assertion [6].

Figure 3.4: Bi UPD (MLCharge – MLMass) vs. scan rate of Bi3+ containing solution (a) in H2SO4 and (b.) in HClO4.

When comparing the number of monolayer based on mass under O2- saturated

condition in H2SO4 with under nitrogen ambient, it is noticed that under O2 condition the

a

b

74

Page 90: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

number of monolayers is higher than the other ambient (see Figure 3.5(b) with Figure 3.6 (b)).

Whereas the number of MLMass in HClO4 under O2-saturated condition has similar coverage as it

in air-saturated condition, but slightly higher than it in N2-purge condition. This may indicates

that the surface of Bi UPD MLMass in H2SO4 during anodic scan may not be just Bi oxide or Bi

adatoms. Anion adsorption of sulfate/bisulfate ions are possible to adsorb on the surface of Bi

oxide. These adsorbed anions interact with the dissolved oxygen and cause delay in Bi UPD

stripping under O2-saturated condition during anodic scan. XPS data supports the finding of

sulfate/bisulfate ions adsorption on Bi oxide surface as it will be shown. Under all the scan rates

(up to 250 mV/s), Bi UPD MLMass in H2SO4 are higher than it in HClO4 under three ambient

conditions.

Figure 3.5: Scan rate effect and ambient effect of Bi UPD ML coverage on Ru in 0.5M H2SO4 +1mM Bi3+ (a.) MLMass (cathodic) (b.) MLMass (anodic) (c.) MLCharge (cathodic) (d.) MLCharge

75

Page 91: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

(anodic).

Figure 3.6: Scan rate effect and ambient effect of Bi UPD ML coverage on Ru in 0.5M HClO4 + 1mM Bi3+ (a.) MLMass (cathodic) (b.) MLMass (anodic) (c.) MLCharge (cathodic) (d.) MLCharge (anodic).

The calculation of MLMass coverage in H2SO4 is higher than it in HClO4 which can be

explained by sulfate/bisulfate anions has higher tendency to adsorb on metal surfaces in acid

solutions than ClO4-. XPS data in later section support this anion adsorption. In addition, Bi

UPD MLCharge gives higher coverage in HClO4 under O2-saturated condition than it in H2SO4

(Figure 3.5 (c) (d) vs. Figure 3.6 (c) (d)). This indicates that the Bi UPD-modified Ru electrode has

higher catalytic property in HClO4 than in H2SO4 under O2-saturate condition.

76

Page 92: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

3.4 XPS Analysis of Bi UPD on Ru under Different Conditions

In addition to the aforementioned anion effect and the ORR reaction, oxidation of Bi

adatoms on Ru could also affect the Bi UPD process. Using XPS, the Bi oxidation was explored,

and the results indicate that the dominated oxidation product is Bi2O3 observed at 158.6(Bi 4f),

see Figure 3.7. Furthermore, more than one complex formed on the surface; however, the

dominant one was Bi2O3 at 158.6eV in both SO42- and ClO4

- solutions. It has been noticed that

the SO42- anion peak shows up at 168.5 eV under the nitrogen purge condition, as shown in

figure 3.7, on the surface, whereas under the non-purge condition there was no SO42-

adsorption or only a very little amount (see figure 3.8). That indicates that the purge of nitrogen

strengthens the sulfate anion adsorption, or it reduces the ORR reactions on the surface,

allowing more SO42- to stick on the surface.

Figure 3.7: XPS of Bi UPD N2 purge deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 with high

77

Page 93: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

scan rate (50mV/s) of depositing Bi on Ru electrode.

Figure 3.8: XPS of Bi UPD non- purge deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 with high scan rate (50mV/s) of depositing Bi on Ru electrode.

For all of the anion conditions, the deposition of Bi on the Ru substrate prevents further

oxidation of Ru. This points to the conclusion that the Bi layer protects the Ru substrate, as

presented in figure 3.9. As can be seen from the XPS data, the Ru surface remains at Ru(0) state

after sputtering, which means it is kept oxide free by the protection of the Bi layer.

78

Page 94: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

The second investigation was to explore the scan rate effect by changing the scan rate of

the deposition (UPD) of the Bi on the surface under N2 from 50 mV/s to 5 mV/s. Our XPS data

show that changing the scan rate will change the surface composition of Bi (0) at 156.5 eV metal

and Bi2O3 at 158.6 eV (figure 3.10). For instance, the higher scan rate was found to have more Bi

(0) metal coverage than the lower scan rate. The lower scan rate gave more time for the Bi

surface to form the complex or to become oxidized, while on the contrary the higher scan rate

left more Bi (0) metal with less Bi2O3. It is observed here that with the low scan rate, shown in

Figure 3.8, the Bi2O3 form shifted slightly after sputtering for 3min with argon (Ar) at the rate

5Ao (based on the SiO2 rate). Moreover, the sputtering didn’t change the oxidation state of the

Bi (0) metal, which means that it was adsorbed strongly to the surface. This means forming

more of Bi2O3 on the surface, making the adhesion stronger to the substrate. Therefore, there is

Figure 3.9: XPS Bi UPD on Ru (no N2 purge) Ru 3d Region at 280 eV which represent the Ru metal or native oxide

79

Page 95: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

no shifting or decreasing in the intensity after sputtering, in the case of lower scanning rate. On

the other hand, the higher scan rate, in figure 3.5, shows the mixture of Bi (0) and Bi2O3 is less

stable because after sputtering for 0.5 min, some of the oxide was removed, and the Bi2O3

shifted to Bi (0). Moreover, with further sputtering, the Bi layer began to disappear. The Bi UPD

continued to protect the Ru from becoming oxidized.

Figure 3.10: XPS of Bi UPD on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 with low scan rate (5mV/s) of depositing Bi on Ru electrode.

Next, the effect of another anion (ClO4-) was tested in the XPS for comparison with SO4

2-.

The Bi2O3 complex remained the dominant form with little Bi (0) (see Figure 3.11). It was noted

that with the use of the ClO4- anion, the adsorption of the Bi UPD and its complex was not as

strong as that of H2SO4. Therefore, after 1 min sputtering almost all the complex had shifted to

Bi (0) metal. Also, it was noted that after 2 min of sputtering, the Bi (0) began to disappear.

80

Page 96: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 3.11: XPS of Bi UPD on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M HClO4.

Finally, the effects of dissolving the anion by rinsing the final sample with water before

analyzing it in the XPS machine were explored. It was observed that the rinse doesn’t remove

the anion completely, but it dissolved some of it. This process led to splitting the peak of the

Bi2O3 to two peaks, which represent two different characteristic of that complex. The big

difference which was detected between the UPD with the rinse and the UPD without rinse was

that the one without the rinse showed more resistance to sputtering of Ar at the rate 5Ao

(based on the SiO2 rate), while the sample with the rinse after sputtering with 1min (5Ao)

shifted to Bi (0) metal and after 2 min it started to disappear as demonstrated in figure 3.12.

81

Page 97: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 3.12: XPS of Bi UPD deposition on Ru cathodic region in 0.5M H2SO4 under N2 with rinse with water after deposition.

3.5 The Ring Rotating Disc Electrode (RRDE) Result of Bi Deposition on Ru

The ring rotating disc electrode (RRDE) is a powerful instrument for detection of the ORR

process on the surface of the electrode. By means of the RRDE, the number of electrons

transferred can be determined in the ORR process. Then the effectiveness of that electrode as

an ORR catalyst can be evaluated. The oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) can go through different

pathways as shown in schema 3-1[7].

82

Page 98: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Schema 3-1: The pathways of ORR.

Oxygen can go through a four electron reduction reaction to form water (k1) and

generate electricity. Alternatively it can go through an intermediate pathway (k2) of two electron

reduction to form peroxide. Then subsequently another two electron reduction can take place,

forming water. Formation of hydrogen peroxide in the proton membrane exchange fuel cell

(PEMFC) can cause corrosion in the fuel cell, decrease the electroactivity, lower the efficiency,

and lead to complete failure. As a result, many studies are exploring new electrocatalysts. The

new catalyst should have higher ORR catalytic efficiency and lower generation of undesirable

hydrogen peroxide as a byproduct. The Pt electrode is considered as one of the best

electrocatalyst for the PEMFC. However, the conversion energy drops from the theoretical value

of 1.229V to 0.78V [8] because of the slow kinetic rate of ORR due to its high overpotential [9,

10]. Therefore, exploration of new catalysts that are economical, durable, resulting in lower

generation of peroxides, and efficient [11, 12] is crucial.

Different techniques can be used to test the rate of ORR and H2O2 formation of the

electrode surface. A high-quality catalyst should have a high, fast ORR, and at the same time the

rate of H2O2 generation should be very low. These two property requirements are the most

important for screening a new electrocatalyst for use in the PEMFC system. To measure the ORR

83

Page 99: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

performance and the formation of H2O2, the rotating ring-disc electrode (RRDE) and the

scanning electrochemical microscope (SECM) are the best techniques currently being used to

evaluate the performance of a new catalyst. In the RRDE system, the rate of ORR and H2O2 can

be detected. A constant positive voltage is applied on the ring electrode, and this will oxidize

and detect what has been produced by the reduction process at the disc electrode. Using the

Koutecky-Levich equation, the number of electrons transferred and the percentages of

peroxides forming on the surface can be calculated, and the ORR efficiency can be evaluated.

Linear sweep voltammetry (LSV) is an electrochemical technique that can pinpoint the

onset potential of the ORR catalyst. However, use of the LSV technique alone can’t determine

how much peroxide is forming. That is why the RRDE combined with the LSV technique is used

for this purpose [13]. To determine the onset potential of the new catalyst, the LSV results with

N2 and O2 are overlapped. The two sets of LSV data will clearly show the onset potential point. If

that overlap doesn’t show the onset potential clearly, the point at which the LSV curve of the

Ring disk

Ring Disk

Flo

w

Figure 3.13: RRDE system sketch.

84

Page 100: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

reduction in current begins to curve will be taken as the point of onset potential. Prior to the

ORR measurement, the Ru electrode surface is polished with a 0.5micron cloth pad. Then it is

electrochemically cleaned and reduced at -0.6V vs. Hg/Hg2SO4. Comparing the nitrogen

background with the oxygen ambient, the LSV can pinpoint the onset potential of ORR at 0.25V

(vs. Hg/Hg2SO4) on the Ru catalyst.

Figure 3.14 (a) and (b) shows the result of Bi UPD on Ru RRDE in 0.5 M H2SO4 at varying

rotating speeds under the condition of saturated O2 compared with the background Ru as

shown in figure 3.15. What’s more, figure 3.14 (c) demonstrates the limiting current at different

applied potentials. The limiting current depends on the applied potential and it increases when

the corresponding overpotential is increased. In figure 3.15 (c), which shows the inverse square

root of rotating speeds versus the current density of disk electrode, the non-linear curve (such

as -0.25V) indicates a complex electron transfer situation. In other words, the reaction rate does

change even when the supply of reactant is increased by an increase in the rotating rate.

85

Page 101: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 3.14: The result of Bi UPD on Ru RRDE system (O2- saturated) a.) The ring current b.) The disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.

Figure 3.15: The result of Ru background RRDE system (O2- saturated) a.) The ring current b.) The disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.

86

Page 102: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

The electron transfer number n can be calculated by following equations

where Neff is the collection efficiency, Id is the disk current, and Ir is the ring current [14, 15].

From the RRDE result, it was observed that Bi UPD enhances the effectiveness of ORR. It

was noted that there was increase in the current in the RRDE result for the disc and ring as well,

see Figures 3.14 and 3.15. A different ambient was studied with a different rotation speed to

discover the change and the effectiveness of Bi UPD on Ru. Under N2, comparing the Bi UPD and

Ru as backgrounds, the result shows increase in the disc and ring current, which indicates that

greater reaction occurred on both surfaces. The onset potential for ORR on the Ru electrode is

slightly lower than the onset potential of Bi UPD toward ORR, as can be observed in figure 3.10.

The percentage of H2O2 forming on the Ru and Bi UPD under these conditions was calculated to

be ca. 1%, which is a good indication of efficient catalyst activity in the fuel cell. The number of

electrons transferred at a potential -0.3V was found to be ca. 3.78 and 3.71 for Bi UPD and Ru

respectively at 900rpm. This means that the O2 was reduced on the surface to form H2O

efficiently, primarily through the 4e- process. These characteristics, also, were explored under

air and under O2 ambient. Both of these conditions show very similar behavior, very close

87

Page 103: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

percentages of H2O2 formation, and close numbers of electrons transferred. The significant

difference was that the disc and ring current was increased dramatically because of the increase

of the O2 content.

Owing to the fact that Bi deposition is unstable in the acidic media [2], the RDE and

RRDE experiments were executed in the solution containing Bi3+. The Bi UPD was deposited, and

then the RRDE LSV was run in the same solution. The advantages of this method are that it

leads to the saving of time during the depositing of Bi UPD and to a guarantee that the Bi layer

still exists. However, the disadvantage is when the LSV is run, the region of the ORR is mixed

with the deposition of Bi on the Ru region even though the rotation is proceeding. That can

explain the incline of the curve at -0.5V in the RRDE figure 3.14; also, it can explain the non-

linear curve on the Koutecky- Levich plot.

Another electrolyte, HClO4 was tested for the purpose of comparing the difference in the

catalytic effectiveness under N2, air, and O2 ambient with different rotation speeds. It has been

noticed that HClO4 has higher catalytic activity for ORR, which can be seen from the significant

increase of the current on the disc and ring. This is consistent with the result that was obtained

from the EQCM. Figure 3.16 and 3.17 evince that the percentage of H2O2 forming on the surface

was ~ 1%, and the number of electrons transferred depends on the rotation speed; it is about

3.75 at 900rpm, which is very efficient.

88

Page 104: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 3.16: The result of Ru background RRDE system in 0.5M HClO4 (O2- saturated) a.) The ring current b.) The disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.

Figure 3.17: The result of Bi UPD on Ru RRDE system in 0.5M HClO4 (O2- saturated) a.) The ring current b.) The disc current c.) Koutecky- Levich plot at varying potential.

a

b

c

a

c

b

89

Page 105: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

3.6 Bi Bulk on Ru Result

Bi bulk deposition in all three ambient conditions gives almost the same MLmass based on

the mass calculation. XPS results show Bi2O3 and Bi adatoms appear in all three ambient

conditions, with a majority of Bi2O3. Also, Bi2O3 is the dominant composition in both

electrolytes, H2SO4 and HClO4, as can be seen in figure 3.18(a) and (b); the location of Bi2O3 is at

158.6eV, and there is a small amount of Bi (0) at 156.5eV. The anodic stripping of the Bi bulk is

more difficult in HClO4 than in H2SO4, as can be noticed from the CV previously shown in figure

3.2. In addition, from the XPS it is noticed that more sputtering is necessary to remove the Bi

bulk in the case in which the HClO4 electrolyte is more than H2SO4, see figure 3.18(a) (b). These

observations lead to the conclusion that the co-deposition of Bi and Bi oxide could occur during

the Bi bulk deposition in both H2SO4 and HClO4.

Figure 3.18: XPS of Bi bulk on Ru. N2 purge. 5 mV/s and hold at ~-0.6V for 7 mints. Sputter rate: 0.5 nm/min and/or 2.3 nm/min (calibrated to SiO2). (a.) Bi 4f (H2SO4) (b.) Bi 4f (HClO4) (c.) O 1s (H2SO4) (d.) O 1s (HClO4)

90

Page 106: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

For further investigation of the bulk surface characterization, another sample was

prepared of Bi bulk deposition under N2 in HClO4 and left in the air for one hour. The purpose of

that sample was to distinguish between instant analysis and analysis of an aged sample. It was

found that the longer the exposure to air, the thicker the oxide formation of Bi2O3, as shown in

figure 3.19(a) (b). That means the oxide layer of Bi is not close packed, with the result that it

allows O2 to penetrate and form more oxide; this is unlike the case of Al2O3, which prevents

further oxidation. This means that the Bi UPD may just be composed of Bi adatoms, but it is

oxidized to Bi2O3 during time in which CV is stopped in the solution, or during the rinsing and

cleaning of the sample, its transportation, the XPS sample preparation, etc., before XPS analysis

is run. In all of the ambient and anion cases, the layer/s of Bi UPD and Bi bulk protect the Ru

substrate form becoming oxidized, see figure 3.15(c).

Figure 3.19: XPS of Bi bulk on Ru. N2 purge. 5 mV/s, holding at ~-0.6V for 7 mins, and then

91

Page 107: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

exposure to air for 1 hour. Sputter rate: 0.5 nm/min and/or 2.3 nm/min (calibrated to SiO2). (a.) Bi 4f (HClO4) (b.) O 1s (HClO4) (c.) Ru 3d (HClO4) (d.) Cl 2p (HClO4).

3.7 Proposed Mechanism of Bi Deposition on Ru

Based on all of these experiments, the mechanism of the Bi UPD deposition and Bi bulk

deposition was explored. It occurs in different regions but can be divided into three major

categories as can be seen in Figure 3.20(a) and (b).

Figure 3.20: (a.) CV and mass response of Bi deposition on Ru. Scan rate of 5 mV/s. (b.) Zoom-in view of CV and mass response in the Bi UPD region.

The above experiments show evidence of ORR reaction on a Bi UPD-modified Ru surface.

Therefore, the mechanism of Bi UPD deposition on Ru in Figure 3.16 is proposed as follows.

Region I—Bi UPD Region

Ru

Bi Bi Bi e- e- e-

Bi3

Ru e- e-

O2 H2O or H O

e-

Ru

O2 H2O or H O

e- Bi Bi e- e-

Stop CV Ru

Bi Bi2O3 Bi2O3

Bi3

Dissolution

+ H2O

H+

e-

e-

H2O H+

92

Page 108: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

In the early stage of cathodic scan, ORR takes place on the fresh Ru surface before Bi

UPD takes place. This explains the earlier onset potential of reduction in current as compared to

the onset potential of mass response. As the cathodic scan reached the Bi UPD region, the mass

of deposition of Bi UPD started to increase while ORR was still taking place. Soon after the

completion of the Bi UPD monolayer on Ru, the oxygen reduction reaction stopped.

Region II—Bi Bulk Deposition Region

As the cathodic scan passed the Bi UPD region, it showed that BI bulk deposition had

taken place. The mass response and current of Bi bulk deposition show a similar amount of

increase in the Bi ML coverage. This indicates that electrons from the working electrode are

exclusively occupied in reducing Bi3+ to Bi on the surface. Notice that the slight difference in the

Bi bulk stripping coverage between the Bi MLMass and Bi MLCharge, see figure 3.1, can be

attributed to unpreventable oxidation of Bi in solution. Depending on the calculation of the

number of monolayers, it can be concluded that no or very little ORR takes place in the Bi bulk

region. Once the CV ceases at the Bi bulk region, the Bi is soon oxidized to Bi2O3, which is then

dissolved in the acidic solution, releasing Bi3+ back to the solution.

Ru

Bi Bi Bi

Bi Bi Bi

Bi Bi Bi e- e- e-

Stop CV Ru

Bi Bi Bi

Bi3+

e- e- e-

Bi3+

Dissolution

+ H2O

H+

Ru

Bi Bi Bi

Bi Bi Bi

Bi Bi2O3 Bi2O3

e-

e-

H2O H+

93

Page 109: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Region III—Bi Bulk Stripping Region

During the anodic scan, the Bi bulk oxidized and dissolved rapidly until the Bi coverage extended

to the completion of the monolayer. Upon the ceasing of the CV near the end of the Bi bulk

oxidizing region, the remaining Bi is soon oxidized to Bi2O3, and then it is dissolved in acidic

solution in the form of Bi3+.

Region IV (1.2 to 0.6 Bi MLMass) & V (< 0.6 Bi MLMass)—Bi UPD Stripping Region

When the anodic CV scans to region IV, a significant reduction in current occurs while

the Bi UPD monolayer undergoes oxidation. This reduction in current is contributed to an

oxygen reduction reaction which reduces the partially-exposed Ru surface while Bi UPD

adatoms are oxidizing. This ORR mechanism is strongly supported by an increase in the

concentration of oxygen in the solution. Notice that in figure 3.2b, the Bi UPD MLcharge is

Ru

Bi Bi Bi e-

Bi3+

Ru

O2 H2O or H2O2

e- Bi Bi e-

Bi3+

Ru

O2 H2O or H2O2

e-

Ru

Bi Bi Bi e-

Bi3+

Stop CV Ru

Bi Bi Bi

Bi Bi Bi

Bi Bi

Bi3+

e- Ru

e- Bi Bi2O3 Bi2O3

Bi3+

Dissolution

+ H2O

H+ e-

H2O H+

94

Page 110: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

significantly larger for O2 purge than for N2 purge or for no gas purge. This can be explained by

the conclusion that O2 purge makes Bi UPD monolayer harder to strip away from the surface.

Notice that in the Bi bulk region, there is no significant difference in Bi MLMass coverage between

O2 purge and N2 purge. This similarity in Bi MLMass coverage signifies that the Bi bulk must be

mainly Bi metal instead of Bi2O3 or another Bi oxide species. In addition, Bi UPD ML in O2

purged solution shows higher resistance to oxidation indicating that the ORR does take place.

Because electrons are provided to the electrode’s surface, Bi UPD adatoms undergo the

reduction reaction instead of oxidation during the anodic scan.

Based on Le Chatelier’s Principle, electrons from ORR shift the reaction Bi Bi3+ + 3e- to

the left, which reduces Bi on the electrode surface and results in higher Bi MLMass coverage in

the Bi UPD region. This explanation implies that ORR can take place at the Bi UPD-modified Ru

electrode surface, despite the fact that there is more than one Bi monolayer coverage, such as

2.5 Bi MLMass coverage or less. Notice that in figure 3.16b region V, the oxidation current starts

appear when the potential of anodic scan reaches to -0.2 V. This can be explained by the

conclusion that electrons from ORR cannot sustain the rate of Bi oxidation. This phenomenon

can also be seen in figures 3.1b and 3.1d, especially in the reaction with O2 purge, where a slight

increase in anodic current and a sudden drop in Bi MLMass near -0.2V are observed. This could

signify that two reactions occurred during the anodic scan: ORR and Bi UPD oxidation. That

means that they were competing for the existing O2. Thus, when there is O2 starvation, one of

these two reactions will be sacrificed to the other or reduced to a minimum.

95

Page 111: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

3.8 Conclusion

The average Bi UPD MLMass (~1.5 Bi ML) coverage is lower than the average Bi UPD

MLCharge (~ 5.0 Bi ML) in H2SO4 under lab ambient. There is little or no variation on the Bi ML

based on mass for all three of N2, air, and O2 ambient, whereas, based on the charge calculation

there is a significant difference in Bi UPD ML coverage between N2, air, and O2. Bi UPD-modified

Ru enhances ORR reaction, both in H2SO4 and in HClO4. The increase in the current of the disc

and ring in the RRDE supports the conclusion that Bi UPD enhances the ORR. The XPS data show

that Bi forms oxide on the surface in all cases. Also, it is found that a low scan rate forms more

uniform Bi2O3 and forms a stronger layer than that which is formed at a higher scan rate; this

layer can’t be removed easily. XPS data strongly support the presence of Bi and Bi oxide,

possibly Bi2O3, on the Bi UPD monolayer. The presence of Bi oxide is possibly due to the

inevitable oxidation of Bi during the time of the stopping of the CV scan, transporting of

samples, and recording of XPS data. The stability of Bi UPD on Ru also supports the evidence of

the presence of Bi oxide (Bi2O3, BiO+, or BiOH2+) when the Bi UPD monolayer or sub-monolayer

is exposed to air or to an oxygen-containing solution for a short period of time. In addition,

multiple LSV oxidation stripping of Bi UPD on Ru shows relatively more stable Bi UPD in HClO4

than in H2SO4. Furthermore, XPS data support the finding of sulfate ion (SO42-) adsorption on Bi

UPD monolayer in H2SO4. However, the stability problem of Bi UPD adatoms on Ru needs to be

solved if it is to be fully utilized as an alternative fuel cell catalyst. Finally, a detailed mechanism

of Bi deposition on Ru is proposed.

96

Page 112: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

3.9 References

1. Cheng, T.J., Li, K.F., Chang, H.C. The Chinese Chem. Soc. 2001, 59, 2, 219-233.

2. Lin, P. M.Sc. Thesis, University of North Texas, 2011.

3. Kathryn, E.; Toghill, G.; Wildgoose, A.; Moshar, B. Chris, B. Richard, G.; Electroanalysis

20, 2008, 16, 1731 – 1737.

4. Kolics, A.; Wieckowski, A. J. Phys. Chem. B 2001, 105, 2588-2595.

5. Brian, K.; Niece, A.; Gewirth, A. Langmuir 1996, 12, 4909-4913.

6. Uhm, S.; Yun, Y.; Tak, Y.; Lee, J. EQCM analysis of Bi oxidation mechanism on a Pt

electrode. Electrochemistry Communications 2005, 7, 1375–1379.

7. Wroblowa, H.S.; Pan, Y.D.; Razumney, G. J. Electroanal. Chem 1976, 60, 195.

8. U.S. Department of Energy, (2009). Technology Installation Review [online]. Available:

http://www.eere.energy.gov/femp/ [accessed 10 November 2009].

9. Chen, Y.; Li, M.; Liao, L.; Jie, X.; Shen, Y. Electrochemistry Communications 2009, 11,

1434.

10. Venkatewara Rao and B. Viswanathan, J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 18907.

11. Bashyam, R.; Zelenay, P. NATURE 2006, 443, 7.

12. Thomas E. Wood, Zhongshu Tan, Alison K. Schmoeckel, David O’Neill, Radoslav

Atanasoski, Journal of Power Source 2008, 178, 510.

13. Bard. A.J.; Faulkner, L.R. Electrochemical Methods: Fundamentals and Applications, 2nd

ed., 2001, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

14. Sethuraman, V.; Weidner, J.; Haug, A.; Motupally, S.; Protsailob, L. Journal of The

Electrochemical Society 2008,155, B50-B57.

97

Page 113: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

15. Yu, K. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of North Texas, 2011.

98

Page 114: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

CHAPTER 4

CHARACTERIZATION OF PLASMA TREATED INTER-LAYER DIELECTRIC (ILD)

ULTRA-LOW-K USING XPS AND FTIR

4.1 Introduction

Moore’s Law (1965), which is predicted by the Intel co-founder Gordon E. Moore

(Chemistry Ph.D. CalTeck), states that the number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively

on an integrated circuit will be doubled approximately every two years [1]. The trend has

continued for more than half a century and is not expected to stop until 2015 or later. To keep

up with Moore’s law, new low-k and ultra-low-k materials have to be invented. The definition of

low- k dielectric is an insulating material that shows weak polarization when exposed to an

external-applied electric field. The dielectric constant, k, is a physical measure of the electric

polarizability of a material, and electric polarizability is the tendency of a material to permit an

externally applied electric field to make electric dipoles [2, 3]. Moreover, the properties of these

materials should have criteria such as stability and isolatation. Silicate and organosilicate are the

most promising material candidates so far [2].

Two different ways to deposit these materials are spin coating and chemical vapor

deposition (CVD). Most researchers use the CVD process to deposit the thin film or low-k

because it gives better control and better distribution of organo-materials like carbon and

fluorine. With the CVD process, silicon dioxide (SiO2) can be doped with fluorine (fluorine-doped

oxide) (F-SiO2), or carbon (carbon-doped oxide) (C-SiO2) [4-8]. These new doped SiO2 materials

are expected to lessen the moisture content in the dielectric. Alternatively, a dielectric with

minimum hydrophilic properties needs to be designed. Since k constant of water is ~ 80, a low-k

99

Page 115: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

dielectric only needs to absorb very small traces of water before losing its permittivity

advantage [9-12].

Organsilicate glass (OSG) composed of Si, C, O, and H, is one of the materials that is proposed as

a promising low-k classification. In these kinds of materials, the carbon bond (Si-C) replaces one

of the oxygen (Si-O) bonds in the SiO2 network, which gives the material porosity and softness

[13-15]. The replacements of carbon in the SiO2 reduce the dielectric value and increase the

isolation properties. The replacement of O with the C in the Organsilicate glass (OSG) structure

can be seen in figure 4.1.

Figure 4. 1: Organsilicate glass (OSG) proposed structure [13].

The first marketable example of a low-k interlayer dielectric arose around 2000. The process

substituted SiO2 with fluorosilicate glass for the 180 nm technology node [16]. The direction of

current research is to create a less than 16nm integrated circuit which, requires a very low-k

100

Page 116: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

dielectric to isolate and function in these circuits. Nevertheless, these materials will need to go

through some modern semiconductor manufacturing chemical and physical processes, which is

an extremely challenging task. The plasma processes of low-k materials are necessary for the

semiconductor chips to sculpt and prepare the pattern, remove the photoresist, and clean the

surface from residues. Even though the plasma treatment can be useful and helpful to do all

these tasks, it can be very harmful in the performance of the chip if not used correctly and in

the right conditions. The changing of the SiO2 to C-SiO2 will add additional porosity to the

material. At the same time, it will lower the dielectric constant, so this new porosity is the

reason for the ultra-low-k (ULK) performance.

To simulate the effect of plasma treatment, two gases were chosen (O2 and H2) to

investigate the chemical modifications on un-patterned ULK without the TEOS layer. ULK film

was 300nm thickness on Si substrate, which is obtained from one of our collaboration

companies. The samples were cut and exposed to plasma for different time periods to study the

time-dependent effect. A Harrick plasma etcher chamber pressure of 100mTorr and a power of

30W was used for O2 and H2 etching. One of the processes that this low-k material should go

through is plasma cleaning, which could induce damage to the surface and cause a failure in the

circuit. In this chapter, some studies will be examined that show the changes on the low-k

surfaces and the composition employed on just the blanket wafer without pattern using

different technique such as the XPS, FT-IR, and AFM [17].

4.2 Characterizations of Dielectric Damages on Blanket Wafer Using FT-IR

Multiple internal reflections infrared (MIR-IR) is when an infrared beam passes through a

101

Page 117: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

surface that has a higher reflective index and bounces inside that object multiple times, which

can increase the sensitivity and resolution of the sample. MIR-IR metrology has been utilized in

our lab to study the effect of plasma treatment on blanket ILD wafers. This metrology can be

successfully characterized as the chemical bonds and the change of these bonds. Furthermore,

the effect of the plasma damage can be quantized. Using our lab tools a fabrication technique

was developed to study the induced damage of plasma on the low-k material. As the picture

shows in figure 4.2, a polished 6X1 cm crystal of Si with the low-K material was fabricated based

on previous procedure [18]. This 45o bevel angle face allows the IR light to travel smoothly and

reflect inside the crystal ca. 90 times, collecting information to the level of nano change [19, 20].

To explore the effect of plasma chemistry on porous low-k material, oxygen (O2) and

hydrogen (H2) plasma etching were investigated on the blanket wafer that was received from

TEL Company. As can be seen on figure 4.3, the oxygen plasma causes significant changes to the

low-k material and changes the bonding structure, which indicates the damage occurred on

these materials due to the plasma treatment.

Figure 4.2: Schematic representation of Multiple internal reflections infrared (MIR-IR) with Si attenuated total reflection (ATR).

102

Page 118: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 4.3: FTIR spectra time dependent O2 plasma ashing on blanket wafer.

-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

IR A

bsor

banc

e (m

abs)

etching time (sec)

OH peak TIR CH3 peak TIR

Figure 4.4: ILD/low-k blanket wafer O2 treatment plots of IR absorption peak heights of CH3 and OH vs. etching time for 1540sec.

103

Page 119: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

The study of the time variable from figure 4.3 and 4.4 show clearly that there is a

gradual increase of the content of the OH group at 3200-3700cm-1. Also, a decrease of the

content of the CH3 group at 2970cm-1 was observed. It can be conclude from these result that

the low-k material was damaged with a time increase in the plasma treatment. Moreover, there

is a forming of double bond carbon and an increase of additional C=O peak at ca. 1720cm-1 to a

certain level. Then it decreases, which means that C=O is formed in the transition state to

change the Si-CH3 to Si-O-H.

4.3 XPS Characterizations of Dielectric Damages on Blanket Wafer

To confirm the result obtained from the FT-IR, the changes of the bond conformation

were investigated using the x-ray photon spectroscopy. First, the effect of O2 plasma was tested

on the blanket wafer for different plasma etching times. As it is shown in figure 4.5, the general

trend of the low-k material shows degradation of the carbon content and changing of the

bonding form.

104

Page 120: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 4.5: C1s core-level spectra for pristine and O2 plasma treatment etching for 70sec un-patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks show at 283.4 eV corresponds to Si-C, C-H [21] and the peaks at 286.4 eV corresponds to C-O [21, 22].

For the original surface sample, the C1s spectrum contains an unresolved, intense peak located

at 283.4 eV coming from the carbon atoms in Si-C bonds of the Si-CH3 group [21]. After the

plasma treatment, significant modifications of the surface composition and structure appear.

105

Page 121: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

From the XPS result, figure 4.6 shows that the carbon content nearly disappeared from

the low-k film when treated with O2 plasma for about twenty five minutes. However, the MIR-IR

spectra display (not shown) indicates some carbon content still exists. This discrepancy can be

explained by the escaped depth of the XPS which is approximately 10nm and is limited to

surface change. While FT-IR penetration goes through the whole crystal and explores the

changes in the whole unit. From the results of the XPS and FT-IR, it can be concluded that the O2

plasma treatment damages the low-k material. Plasma treating of low-k film changes bond

conformation on the surface by breaking the Si-C-H and forming Si-O/H, which is alters the

Figure 4.6: C1s core-level spectra for pristine and O2 plasma treatment etching from 100 to 1540sec un-patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks show at 284.2 eV corresponds to Si-C, C-H [21] and the peaks at 286.4 eV corresponds to C-O [22].

106

Page 122: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

dielectric constant. These changes can cause the chip to absorb a lot of water, negatively

affecting chips efficiency and even leading to total device failure.

-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

C1s XPS peakarea CH3 peak TIR

etching time (sec)

Nor

mal

ize c

urve

XPS

C(1

s)In

tegr

ated

are

a

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

IR A

bsor

banc

e (m

abs)

Figure 4.7: TIR spectra of a 300 nm blanket low-k films measured and normalized curve XPS C (1s) of integrated area 280-290 eV after O2 plasma etching vs. etching time for 1540sec.

As shown in figure 4.7, the C1s XPS analysis showed 50% reduction in carbon (C) counts

within 20-40 sec of the etching time and a negligible reduction of C after 220 sec. This result is

inconsistent with the MIR-IR results, indicating that XPS was only able to probe a few nm deep

and thus unable to see damage in the bulk. However, the transmission infrared TIR shows the

same behavior of the XPS, which means that TIR is also more sensitive to surface change than

107

Page 123: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

the bulk damage. Moreover, TIR is more reliable in the lower range of the IR spectrum, from 400

to 1600cm-1, than the upper range from 1600 to 4000cm-1.

Based on these results and the previous analysis, the best technique to use in analyzing

the ILD damages is the MIR-IR, which was able to detect the changes of the film on the surface

and the bulk. Also, the MIR-IR is extremely sensitive, as it can detect minute film changes

smaller than nanometers. The XPS the technique, however, only registers what is happening on

the surface within a few nm. Furthermore, the technique requires researches to break down its

spectra before they can study what happens beneath the film surface.

Figure 4.7 displays the differences in the sample and after progressive O2 plasma

treatments. As it can be seen from the figure, the total integrated area of the carbon (C1s) XPS

peak was used. Also, the biggest change in bond and largest decrease in carbon occurred within

the first 200sec; for the rest of the time, the oxygen plasma continued removing a slight amount

of the carbon. Again, the limit of the C1s XPS signal is a result of this sample analysis and within

the limit of escaped depth of an XPS photoelectron, which is about 10nm.

The other plasma treatment gas tested on the sample was hydrogen (H2) which yields

different results than the O2 plasma. From figure 4.8 and 4.9, it can be seen that in the

treatment of the low-k sample with hydrogen plasma, there is little influence on the change in

carbon content.

108

Page 124: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 4.8: C1s core-level spectra for pristine and O2 plasma treatment etching for 70sec un-patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks shows at 284.0eV correspond to Si-C, C-H [23] and the peaks at 286.4 eV corresponds to C-O [23].

300 298 296 294 292 290 288 286 284 282 280 278 276

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Inte

sity a

.u.

Binding energy (eV)

100secH treatment 220secH treatment 340secH treatment 640secH treatment 940secH treatment 1540secH treatment

C1s 283.6. eV Si-C, C-H

General trend

C1s 286.2 eV, C-O

C1s

C1s 285.6 eV, C-C, C=C

Figure 4.9: C1s core-level spectra for pristine and H2 plasma treatment etching for 70sec un-patterned low-k material. The C1s peaks shows at 283.6 eV correspond to Si-C, C-H [23], and the peaks at 285.6 eV corresponds to C=C and C-C, and the peaks at 286.4 eV C-O.

109

Page 125: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Also, with H2 plasma, the bond configuration remains relatively consistent; thus, when

compared to the O2 plasma, the damage caused by the H2 plasma is insignificant, meaning that

the latter is a better choice for cleaning the surface during the post cleaning.

-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 16000.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.21.3

C(1s) H treatement integrated area

Norm

aliz

e In

tegr

ated

are

a

etching time (sec)

Figure 4.10: Normalized curve Hydrogen plasma treatment of blanket wafer ILD/ low-k, analysis of XPS C1s integrated area from 280-290eV.

By displaying the normalized curve of H2 plasma treatment, figure 4.6 shows less

removed of carbon over time. Also, after 40sec, the carbon content increase, which can be

explained this way: during first 40sec, the H2 plasma cleans the top surface without any

changing the actual content of the ILD/low-k material. After 70sec of H2 plasma, the low-k

material starts to change and the carbon bonds break; that is why the carbon intensity begins to

110

Page 126: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

decline. However, not much carbon was removed. As it can be seen from the figure, with H2

plasma half was lost compared to the original, while with O2 plasma all surface carbon was

removed. In the hydrogen plasma treatment, the configuration of the ILD/low-k film changed

after 100sec, while with the oxygen plasma treatment, changes became observable in the first

10sec.

4.4 Characterization of ILD Plasma Treatment Using AFM and Optical Microscope

Because carbon increase the porosity of the ILD/low-k material, it is expected that the

O2 and H2 treatment will reduce the porosity and increase the roughness. For that purpose, the

optical microscope and atomic force microscope (AFM) were used to explore the differences in

surface features and reflection color. From the optical picture, it can be seen that with each

treatment, the color changed dramatically, changes due to alteration in the structure’s bond

confirmation and porosity. It has been observed that the changes in color correspond to

changes of the penetration and reflection of the light from and in the surface before and after

treatment. As it can be seen figure 4.11, after each treatment, the color of each sample is differs

dramatically.

111

Page 127: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 4.11: Wafer before and after treatment of O2 plasma magnify for 100x. a) TEL blanket wafers as is wafer. b) TEL blanket wafers 100sec O2 plasma. c) TEL blanket wafers 640sec O2 plasma. d) TEL blanket wafers 1540sec O2 plasma.

The next experiment is to investigate the change of ILD/low-k material using the AFM

instrument, which can detect the roughness of the surface and smoothness. Figure 4.12 it

shows that the roughness of the surface increases significantly after treatment with O2 plasma.

a b

c d

112

Page 128: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

a)

b)

Figure 4.12: a) AFM image roughness of as is blanket wafer. b) AFM image roughness of 100sec O2 plasma treatment blanket wafer.

113

Page 129: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 4.13: a) AFM image roughness of 640sec O2 plasma treatment blanket wafer. b) AFM image roughness of 1540sec O2 plasma treatment blanket wafer.

114

Page 130: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

As one can notice from figure 4.11 and 4.13, the roughness of the ILD/low-k material

begins to increase after the treatment of O2 plasma which means that the porosity of the

sample starts to collapse, and the carbon bonds begin to break down. Interestingly, at the

beginning, the roughness decreases, which is related to a more transitional state where the

chemical bond is dangling and not totally broken. However, at the end of the treatment, the

surface is extremely rough due to the removal of most of the carbon from the surface. The

roughness measurement is shown in table 4.1.

As is (nm) 100 sec (nm) 640sec (nm) 1540sec (nm)

4.61 0.88 8.23 91.3

1.4 1.156 25.2 39.6

21.12 3.671 3.47 56.4

17.71 1.22 14.6 164.3

7.566 12.4 11.2 99.2

Average 10.4812 3.8654 12.54 90.16

Table 4.1: The measurement of AFM roughness of TEL blanket wafer before and after treatment

with O2 plasma.

4.5 Conclusion and Future Work

Different types of plasma gases can cause variable damages on the low-k materials. This

115

Page 131: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

will be interesting to investigate, as researches and companies should target the right one for

cleaning and ensuring device preservation. Choosing the right technique is also crucial when

evaluating the plasma damage for these materials. As it was shown from the result of the

analysis of the FT-IR compared to the outcome from the XPS, there is variation, which could be

significant for the evaluation of plasma damage. Since XPS is limited to surface analysis for the

damage, it could provide less accurate results while the FT-IR processes through the whole

sample, making for a more comprehensive assessment. Future work will engage the effects of

other plasma gases such as CH4, N2 and CO2. Additionally, the same processes on the trench

pattern wafer will be investigated and evaluated with regard to side wall damage. More

chemical interactions before and after these treatments will be explored and observed the

effect of these chemicals on cleaning such as water, acids, or bases will be observed. Using our

powerful FT-IR technique alongside XPS will give a clearer picture for the semiconductor

industries and help researchers see the plasma effect on ILD pattern structure, leading to better

and more reliable devices.

116

Page 132: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

4.6 References

1. Shul, R.J.; Pearton, S.J. Handbook of Advanced Plasma Processing Techniques. Springer

2000.

2. Baklanov, M.; Ho, P.; Zschech, E. Advanced interconnects for ULSI Technology. John Wiley

& sons, Chichester, UK, 2012.

3. Baklanov, M.; Green, M.; Maex, K. Dielectric Films for Advanced Microelectronics. John

Wiley & sons, 2007.

4. Tagami, M.; Ogino, A.; Miyajima, H.; Shobo, H.; Baumann, F.; Ito, F.; Sponner, T. ECS

Transaction. 2011, 40, 405-413.

5. Chaudhari, M.; Du, J.; Behera, S; Manandhar, S.; Gaddam, S.; Kelber. J. Appl. Phys. Lett.

2009, 94, 204102.

6. Behera, S.P.; Wang, Q.; Kelber, J. J. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2011, 44, 155204.

7. Bao, P.; Shi, H.; Liu, J.; huang, H.; Ho, S.; Goodner, D.; Moinpour, M.; Kloster, G. J. Vac. Sci.

Technol. B. 2008, 26, 219.

8. Jnnai, B.; Nozawa, T.; Samukawa, S. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 2008, 26, 1926.

9. Baklanov, R.; Travaly, Y.; Le, T.; Shamiryan, D.; Vanhaelemeersch, S. Silicon Nitride, Silicon

Dioxide, Thin Insulating Films and Other Emerging Dielectrics YIII. ECS. 2005, 179-198.

10. Le, T.; Baklanov, R.; Kesters, E.; Azioune, A.; Struyf, H.; Boullart, W.; Pireaux, J.;

Vanhaelemeersch, S. Electrochem. Solid State Lett. 2005, 8, F21- F24.

11. Ijima, T.; Lin, Q.; Chen, S.; Labelle, C.; Fuller, N.; Ponoth, S.; Lloyd, J.; Dunn, D.; Muzzy, C.;

Gill, J.; Nitta, S.; Spooner, T.; Nye, H. Proceedings of IEEE IITC 2006, 21.

117

Page 133: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

12. Bao, J.; Shi, H.; Liu, J.; Huang, H.; Ho, S.; Goodner, D.; Moinpour, M.; Kloster, G.;

McSwiney, M. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A. 2010, 28,2.

13. Morgen, M.; Ryan, E.; Zhao, J.; Hu, C.; Cho, T.; Ho, P. Annual Review of

Materials Science 2000, 30, 645.

14. Kittel, C. Introduction to solid state physics, 7th edition. 1996, Wiley, New York

15. Maex, K.; Baklanov, M.; Shamiryan, D.; Iacopi, F.; Brongersma, S.; Yanovitskaya, Z. J.

Appl. Phys. 2003, 93, 8793.

16. Grill, A.; Neumayer, A. J. Appl. Phys. 2003, 94, 6697.

17. Volksen, W.; Miller, R. D.; Dubois, G. Chem. Rev. 2010, 110, 56.

18. Chyan, O.; Wu, J.; Chen, J. J. Applied Spectroscopy 1997, 51, 1905.

19. Chyan, O.; Chen, J.; Xu, F.; Wu, J. Anal. Chem. 1997, 69, 2434.

20. Abell, T.; Lee, J.; Moinpour, M. Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 2006, 914.

21. Le, Q. T.; Baklanov, M. R.; Kesters, E.; Azioune, A.; Struyf, H.; Boullart, W.; Pireaux, J.;

Vanhaelemeersch, S. Electrochemical and Solid-State Letters 2005, 8, 7, F21-F24.

22. Bao, J.; Shi, H.; Huang, H.; Ho, H. Oxygen plasma damage to blanket and patterned

ultralow- surfaces. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 2010. 28, 2, 207-215

23. Bao, J.; Shi, H.; Liu, J.; Huang, H.; Ho, P. International Interconnect Technology

Conference, IEEE 2007.

118

Page 134: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

5.1 Conclusion

Graphene grown using the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) has special requirements for

formation in the desired way. It is necessary to have the right set-up in the CVD machine to

grow continuous uniform graphene. The pressure plays a significant role in terms of whether

graphene will form or not. Most of the graphene grown should be uniform between 3-10

monolayers with less than 5% defects for Cu substrate. If more than 5% defects or breaking is

observed that is means the system has to be checked and the parameters have to be reset. A Ni

substrate it will grow more graphene layers, up to approximately 50 monolayers. There are

many applications for CVD graphene. Some of the applications have been explored. For

example, as a gas detector graphene can be sensitive enough to detect one molecule on the

surface. Carbon monoxide and dioxide can be detected using the quartz crystal microbalance

(QCM) up to a sub-nona monolayer.

In the Bi work the catalytic effect of the Bi UPD on Ru shows promising features

regarding the ORR. The discrepancy in the reduction region between the charge and the mass

calculation of the monolayer is most likely a result of enhancing of the ORR on the surface. The

ambient plays important roles in increasing the current on the reduction region. The anion

effect also shows an effect on the adsorption of the Bi UPD combined under the N2 ambient.

119

Page 135: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

Figure 5.1: CV and Mass response on the deposition of Bi UPD on Ru.

The fact that this discrepancy was observed on the UPD and not on the Bi bulk proves

that the Bi UPD on the Ru is the reason for the charge differences. Bulk Bi has some

characteristics leading to ORR. However, this could be because of the open structure deposition

or because of the Bi behavior, a question that should be investigated further in future work.

The Inter-layer dielectric (ILD) ultra-low-k work demonstrates that the XPS shows that a

plasma type does affect how much damage can be caused to the ILD. Moreover, there is a

change on the bond conformation which forms from the reaction of the plasma radical and the

material of the ILD. Some of this material attaches to the surface, and some is washed off. The

time dependent study showed that there are many complicated changes to the ILD, depending

-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

Current Density vs. Potential (5 mV/s) Delta Mass vs. Potential (5 mV/s)

Potential (V) (vs. Hg/Hg2SO4)

Curre

nt D

ensi

ty (u

A/cm

2 )

-0.20-0.15-0.10-0.050.000.050.100.150.200.250.300.350.400.450.500.550.600.650.700.750.80

Bi Monolayer (by M

ass)

120

Page 136: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

on the time of the treatment; it also demonstrated the vulnerability of the surface to catch

moisture.

5.2 Future Work

Future work on graphene in our lab will be begin with growing graphene using Ni foils

and comparing the characteristics of the graphene grown on Cu and Ni for the same

experiment. For example, the hydrogenation of the graphene can be tested on both graphene

transferred from Cu and graphene transferred from Ni. Moreover, some electrochemistry

experiments can be carried out to demonstrate the effect of more monolayers on conductivity

and the catalytic effect. Some metal deposition can be tested to demonstrate the

reproducibility of the surface and the decoration system. Graphene shows good resistance to

metal corrosion, which can be explored widely with and without the inhibitors. Different types

of toxic gases, such as NOx, SOx, and carbon base gases, can be tested on the surface of the

graphene. Graphene can be transferred or grown on the substrate; it will be interesting to

distinguish between these two types with regard to the applications which were mentioned

previously. Furthermore, several materials can be tested for the growth of graphene on the

substrate directly, including metal. If graphene can be attached directly to the substrate without

any process of etching or dissolving, that will make it more reliable and effective. Graphene can

be used as a base in electric devices, which can be decorated with imbedded metals or

semiconductor materials.

More work can be carried out on questions regarding Bi deposition such as the effect of

the cations, and more testing can be done to verify the ORR behavior. Investigation of the

121

Page 137: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

structure of Bi UPD and Bulk on Ru is another interesting area that may be important for

understanding this is. As has been mentioned before, Bi bulk shows an interesting behavior in

relation to ORR, and it may be useful to study Bi bulk on Ru using the RRDE system to clarify

that behavior. Because of the instability of the Bi deposited on Ru in the acid media to test the

ORR directly and accurately, a nafion cast can be used to hold the layer during the test.

The Inter-layer dielectric (ILD) ultra-low-k work is still in the beginning stages, and still

has long way to go. Changing the plasma gases such as CH4, N2 and CO2 treatment will be an

interesting area of exploration related to the blanket wafers. More investigation can be done on

the pattern wafers with the plasma gases, and the results can be compared to those with the

blanket. Wet reaction, such as HF, can be investigated with both kinds of wafers. XPS can be a

powerful tool to explore what is on the surface, but for the ILD change composition, FT-IR can

be more comprehensive. The direction of the beam in x-ray analysis of the sample on the XPS

can be critical to determining the intensity and even the type of bonds shown.

122

Page 138: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Stoffel, A.; Kovacs, A.; Kronast, W.; Muller, R. J. Micromech. Microeng. 1996, 6, 1-13.

2. Chen, I.; Jang, C.; Xiao, S.; Ishigami, M.; Fuhrer, M. Nature Nanotechnology 2008, 3, 206 –

209.

3. Suntola, T. Handbook of Crystal Growth, D. T. J. Hurle, Editor, Chap. 14, Elsevier Science B. V.,

Amsterdam 1994, 3.

4. Leskela, M.; Ritala, M. Thin Solid Films 2002, 409, 138.

5. Willey, R. R. Practical Design of Optical Thin Films, (Willey Optical, Consultants, Charlevoix,

Mich., 2007), pp.45-46.

6. http://www.ionfusion.com/technology

7. Xiliang, L.; Jason, J. D. Chem Soc Rev. 2013, 42, 5944.

8. http://physicalchemistryresources.com/book_1_sections_graphicfiles_06152009/MPC_ec_

Voltammetry_06152009/PC_ec_Voltammetry_05262009_web_05302009.htm

9. Flatgen, G.; Wasle, S.; Lubke, M.; Eickes, C.; Radhakrishnan, G.; Doblhofer, K.; Ert, G.

Electrochim. Acta. 1999, 44, 4499.

10. Sauerbrey, Günter (April 1959) Zeitschrift für Physik 155.

11. http://www.neoscience.co.kr/products/prod_view.php?cls=030110&prod_code=0000255

12. http://electroanalisis.blogspot.com/2012/05/hydrodynamic-voltammetry.html

13. Bard, A.J.; Faulkner, L.R. Electrochemical Methods: Fundamentals and Applications. New

York: John Wiley & Sons, 2nd Edition, 2000.

14. Briggs, D.; Seah, M. Practical Surface Analysis. Volume 1 – Auger and X-ray Photoelectron

Spectroscopy. Second Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 1990.

123

Page 139: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

15. Wagner, C. D.; Riggs, W. M.; Davis, L. E.; Moulder, J. F. Handbook of X-ray Photoelectron

Spectroscopy, 1st ed. (G. E. Muilenberg, editor), Perkin-Elmer Corporation (Physical

Electronics), 1979.

16. Ebel, M.F., Absolute calibration of an X-Ray photoelectron Spectrometer, Journal of Electron

Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena 1976, 8, 213.

17. Vickerman, J. C., Ed. Surface Analysis - The Principal Techniques; John Wiley & Sons: New

York, 1997.

18. Stuart, H. Infrared Spectroscopy. Fundamentals and Applications 2004, John Wiley & Sons

Ltd.

19. http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Physical_Chemistry/Spectroscopy/Fundamentals/The_Power_

of_the_Fourier_Transform_for_Spectroscopists

20. Skoog, D.; Leary, J. Principles of Instrumental Analysis, fourth edition. Fort Worth: Saunders

College Publishing. 1992.

21. Prajapati, P.; Prajapati, A. Raman Spectroscopy: A Versatile Tool in Pharmaceutical Analysis,

International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research 2011, 9, 1, 57-64.

22. Robert, B. Resonance Raman spectroscopy, Photosynth Res 2009, 101,147–155.

23. Gross, L.; Mohn, F.; Moll, N.; Liljeroth, P.; Meyer, G. Science 2009, 325.

24. http://www.olympusconfocal.com/theory/confocalintro.html

25. Wickramashinghe, H. K. Sci. Am. 1989, 98.

26. Pool, R. Science, 1990, 247, 634.

124

Page 140: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

27. Jeffree, C. E.; Read, N. D. Ambient- and Low-temperature scanning electron microscopy. In

Hall, J. L.; Hawes, C. R. Electron Microscopy of Plant Cells 1991. London: Academic Press.

28. Goldstein, J.; Newbury, D E. ; Joy, D C. ; Lyman, C E. ; Echlin, P.; LIfshin, E.; Sawyer, L.;

Michael, J R. Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-ray Microanalysis (3 ed). Springer 2003.

29. Yoo, E. J.; Kim, J.; Hosono, E.; Zhou, H. S.; Kudo, T.; Honma, I. Nano Lett. 2008, 8, 2277–

2282.

30. Abraham, K. M, Jiang, Z. J. Electrochem Soc. 1996, 143, 1-5.

31. Shimonishi, A.; Zhang, T.; Johnson, P.; Imanishi, N.; Hirano, A.; Takeda, Y.; Yamamoto, O.;

Sammes, N. J. Power Sources, 2011, 196, 5128-513.

32. Li, X. S.; Cai, W. W.; An, J. H.; Kim, S.; Nah, J.; Yang, D. X.; Piner, R. D.; Velamakanni, A.; Jung,

I.; Tutuc, E.; Banerjee, S. K.; Colombo, L.; Ruoff, R. S. Science 2009, 324, 1312–1314

33. Li, X.; Zhu, Y.; Cai, W.; Borysiak, M.; Han, B.; Chen, D.; Piner, R.; Colombo, L.; Ruoff, R. Nano

Lett. 2009, 9, 12.

34. Yu, Q. et al., Graphene segregated on Ni surfaces and transferred to insulators. Appl. Phys.

Lett. 2008, 93, 113103.

35. Pham, P.; Zande, A.; Xu, X.; McEuen, P. Chemical vapor deposition growth of graphene, 2009.

Cornell CNS REU Presentation

36. Li, X.; Cai, W.; Colombo, L.; Ruoff, R. Nano Lett. 2009, 9, 12.

37. Kim, K.; Zhao, Y.; Jang, H.; Lee, S.; Kim, J.; Kim, K. S.; Ahn, J.; Kim, P.; Choi, J.; Hong, B. Nature

2009, 457.

38. Zande, A.; McEuen, P. Graphene fabrication, mceuen group wiki.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=Graphene+fabrication,+mceuen+group&start=271&sa=X

125

Page 141: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

&biw=1280&bih=921&tbm=isch&tbnid=Ng_cmLH5wKuaxM:&imgrefurl=http://central.oak.g

o.kr/search/detailarticle.jsp%3Farticle_seq%3D10989%26tabname%3Dabst%26resource_se

q%3Dnull%26keywords%3Dnull&docid=vASW9_NGWjOChM&imgurl=http://central.oak.go.

kr/repository/journal/10989/HGTSB6_2012_v13n1_1_f007.jpg&w=689&h=534&ei=hIl6Ua6

oOK-

34AOD8oCwBA&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:81,s:200,i:247&iact=rc&dur=736&page=11&tbnh=

176&tbnw=223&ndsp=26&tx=99&ty=86.

39. Lu, J.; Drzal, L.T.; Worden, R.M.; Lee, I. Chemistry of Materials. 2007, 19, 6240.

40. Lu, Y. C.; Gasteiger, H. A.; Crumlin, E.; McGuire, R.; Shao- Horn, Y. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2010,

157, A1016.

41. A. C. Ferrari, J. C. Meyer, V. Scardaci, C. Casiraghi M. Lazzeri F. Mauri S. Piscanec D. Jiang K.

S. Novoselov S. Roth, and A. K. Geim, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, 2006, 97, 187401.

42. Lui, H. C.; Lui, L; Mak, K. F.; Flynn, G.; Heinz, T. Nature 2010, 462, 339-341.

43. Shen, J.; Hu, Y.; Shi, M.; Lu, X.; Qin, C.; Li, C.; Ye, M. Chem. Mater. 2009, 21, 3514-3520.

44. Diankov, G.; Neumann, M.; Goldhaber-Gordon, D. ACSNANO, 2013.

45. Young J.S.; Yingying, W.; Han, H.; Gopinadhan, K.; Andrew, T.S.; Zexiang, S.; Charanjit, S. B.;

Hyunsoo, Y. Langmuir. 2010, 26, 3798–3802.

46. Luo, Z.; Yu, T.; Kim, K.-J.; Ni, Z.; You, Y.; Lim, S.; Shen, Z.; Wang, S.; Lin, J. ACS Nano 2009, 3,

1781– 1788.

47. Yang, R.; Zhang, L.; Wang, Y.; Shi, Z.; Shi, D.; Gao, H.; Wang, E.; Zhang, G. Adv. Mater. 2010,

22, 4014–4019.

48. http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1171631

126

Page 142: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

49. Lord, R. C.; Miller, F. A. Applied Spectroscopy 1956, 10, 115-123.

50. McNelles, P. PhD. Dissertation, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2011.

51. Jones, J.D.; Hoffmann, W.D.; Jesseph, A.V.; Morris, C.J.; Verbeck, G.F.; Perez, J.M.

Applied Physics Letters 2010, 97, 233104.

52. Jones, J.D.; Morris, C.J.; Verbeck, G.F.; Perez, J.M. Applied Surface Science 2013, 264, 853–

863.

53. Zhou, M.; Lu, Y.; Cai, Y.; Zhang, C.; Feng, Y. Nanotechnology 2011, 22, 385502.

54. Colthup, N. B.; Daly, L. H. Introduction to Infrared and Raman Spectroscopy. 3rd ed.; Stephen

E. Wiberley, 1990.

55. Elias, D.; Nair, R.; Mohiuddin, T.; Morozov, S.; Blake, P.; Halsall, M.; Ferrari, M.; Boukhvalov,

W.; Katsnelson, M.; Geim, K.; Novoselov, K. Science 2009, 323.

56. Liu, C.; Jia, R.; Ye, X.; Zeng, Z. THE JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS 2013, 139, 034704.

57. Shi, Z.; Yang, R.; Zhang, L.; Wang, Y.; Liu, D.; Shi, D.; Wang, E.; Zhang, G. Adv. Mater. 2011, 23,

3061– 3065.

58. Liu, S.Q.; Tang, Z.Y. J. Mater. Chem. 2010, 20, 24.

59. M. Riskin, R. Tel-Vered, I. Willner, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2009, 19, 2474.

60. Li, J.; Guo, S.; Zhai, Y.; Wang, E. Electrochemistry Communications, 2009, 11, 1085-1088.

61. Song, Y.; He, Z.; Zhu, H.; Hou, H.; Wang, L. Electrochimica Acta. 2011, 58, 757– 763.

62. Cheng, T.J., Li, K.F., Chang, H.C. The Chinese Chem. Soc. 2001, 59, 2, 219-233.

63. Lin, P. M.Sc. Thesis, University of North Texas, 2011.

64. Kathryn, E.; Toghill, G.; Wildgoose, A.; Moshar, B. Chris, B. Richard, G.; Electroanalysis 20,

2008, 16, 1731 – 1737.

127

Page 143: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

65. Kolics, A.; Wieckowski, A. J. Phys. Chem. B 2001, 105, 2588-2595.

66. Brian, K.; Niece, A.; Gewirth, A. Langmuir 1996, 12, 4909-4913.

67. Uhm, S.; Yun, Y.; Tak, Y.; Lee, J. EQCM analysis of Bi oxidation mechanism on a Pt electrode.

Electrochemistry Communications 2005, 7, 1375–1379.

68. Wroblowa, H.S.; Pan, Y.D.; Razumney, G. J. Electroanal. Chem 1976, 60, 195.

69. U.S. Department of Energy, (2009). Technology Installation Review [online]. Available:

http://www.eere.energy.gov/femp/ [accessed 10 November 2009].

70. Chen, Y.; Li, M.; Liao, L.; Jie, X.; Shen, Y. Electrochemistry Communications 2009, 11, 1434.

71. Venkatewara Rao and B. Viswanathan, J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 18907.

72. Bashyam, R.; Zelenay, P. NATURE 2006, 443, 7.

73. Thomas E. Wood, Zhongshu Tan, Alison K. Schmoeckel, David O’Neill, Radoslav Atanasoski,

Journal of Power Source 2008, 178, 510.

74. Sethuraman, V.; Weidner, J.; Haug, A.; Motupally, S.; Protsailob, L. Journal of The

Electrochemical Society 2008,155, B50-B57.

75. Yu, K. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of North Texas, 2011.

76. Shul, R.J.; Pearton, S.J. Handbook of Advanced Plasma Processing Techniques. Springer 2000.

77. Baklanov, M.; Ho, P.; Zschech, E. Advanced interconnects for ULSI Technology. John Wiley &

sons, Chichester, UK, 2012.

78. Baklanov, M.; Green, M.; Maex, K. Dielectric Films for Advanced Microelectronics. John Wiley

& sons, 2007.

79. Tagami, M.; Ogino, A.; Miyajima, H.; Shobo, H.; Baumann, F.; Ito, F.; Sponner, T. ECS

Transaction. 2011, 40, 405-413.

128

Page 144: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

80. Chaudhari, M.; Du, J.; Behera, S; Manandhar, S.; Gaddam, S.; Kelber. J. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009,

94, 204102.

81. Behera, S.P.; Wang, Q.; Kelber, J. J. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2011, 44, 155204.

82. Bao, P.; Shi, H.; Liu, J.; huang, H.; Ho, S.; Goodner, D.; Moinpour, M.; Kloster, G. J. Vac. Sci.

Technol. B. 2008, 26, 219.

83. Jnnai, B.; Nozawa, T.; Samukawa, S. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 2008, 26, 1926.

84. Baklanov, R.; Travaly, Y.; Le, T.; Shamiryan, D.; Vanhaelemeersch, S. Silicon Nitride, Silicon

Dioxide, Thin Insulating Films and Other Emerging Dielectrics YIII. ECS. 2005, 179-198.

85. Le, T.; Baklanov, R.; Kesters, E.; Azioune, A.; Struyf, H.; Boullart, W.; Pireaux, J.;

Vanhaelemeersch, S. Electrochem. Solid State Lett. 2005, 8, F21- F24.

86. Ijima, T.; Lin, Q.; Chen, S.; Labelle, C.; Fuller, N.; Ponoth, S.; Lloyd, J.; Dunn, D.; Muzzy, C.; Gill,

J.; Nitta, S.; Spooner, T.; Nye, H. Proceedings of IEEE IITC 2006, 21.

87. Bao, J.; Shi, H.; Liu, J.; Huang, H.; Ho, S.; Goodner, D.; Moinpour, M.; Kloster, G.; McSwiney,

M. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A. 2010, 28,2.

88. Morgen, M.; Ryan, E.; Zhao, J.; Hu, C.; Cho, T.; Ho, P. Annual Review of

Materials Science 2000, 30, 645.

89. Kittel, C. Introduction to solid state physics, 7th edition. 1996, Wiley, New York

90. Maex, K.; Baklanov, M.; Shamiryan, D.; Iacopi, F.; Brongersma, S.; Yanovitskaya, Z. J. Appl.

Phys. 2003, 93, 8793.

91. Grill, A.; Neumayer, A. J. Appl. Phys. 2003, 94, 6697.

92. Volksen, W.; Miller, R. D.; Dubois, G. Chem. Rev. 2010, 110, 56.

93. Chyan, O.; Wu, J.; Chen, J. J. Applied Spectroscopy 1997, 51, 1905.

129

Page 145: Interfacial characterization of chemical vapor deposition

94. Chyan, O.; Chen, J.; Xu, F.; Wu, J. Anal. Chem. 1997, 69, 2434.

95. Abell, T.; Lee, J.; Moinpour, M. Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 2006, 914.

96. Bao, J.; Shi, H.; Liu, J.; Huang, H.; Ho, P. International Interconnect Technology Conference,

IEEE 2007.

130