Electroless gold as a substrate for self-assembled monolayers

Langmuir

Volumn 14, Issue 12, 1998, Pages 3287-3297

  Hou, Zhizhong ^a   Abbott, Nicholas L ^a   Stroeve, Pieter ^a  

^a University of California   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTACT ANGLE; CYCLIC VOLTAMMETRY; ELECTROLESS PLATING; FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY; GLASS; GOLD; MONOLAYERS; POLYCARBONATES; POLYMERIC MEMBRANES; SUBSTRATES; SULFUR COMPOUNDS; SURFACE ROUGHNESS;

HEXADECANE; SELF ASSEMBLED MONOLAYERS;

METALLIC FILMS;

EID: 0032499584     PISSN: 07437463     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/la971327p     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Mallory, G. O., Hajdu, J. B., Eds. Electroless Plating: Fundamentals and Applications; American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers Society: Orlando, FL, 1990; Chapter 1.
2. Hajdu, J. B. Plating Surf. Finish. 1996, 83 (Sept.), 29-33.
3. Menon, V. P.; Martin, C. R. J. Anal. Chem. 1995, 67, 1920-1928.
4. Nishizawa, M.; Menon, V. P.; Martin, C. R. Science 1995, 268, 700-702.
5. Jirage, K. B.; Hulteen, J. C.; Martin, C. R. Science 1997, 278, 655-658.
6. Nuzzo, R. G.; Allara, D. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983, 105, 4481-4483
7. Bain, C. D.; Troughton, E. B.; Tao, Y.-T.; Evall, J.; Whitesides, G. M.; Nuzzo, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 321-335.
8. Porter, M. D.; Bright, T. B.; Allara, D. L.; Chidsey, C. E. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1987, 109, 3559-3568.
9. Whitesides, G. M.; Laibinis, P. E. Langmuir 1990, 6, 87-96.
10. Ulman, A. CHEMTECH 1995, 25 (3), 22-28.
11. Dubois, L. H.; Nuzzo, R. G. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 1992, 43, 437-463.
12. Ulman, A. An Introduction to Ultrathin Organic Films: from Langmuir-Blodgett to Self-Assembly; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, 1991; pp 279-298.
13. Rubinstein, I.; Steinberg, S.; Tor, Y.; Shanzer, A.; Sagiv, J. Nature 1988, 332, 426-428.
14. Abbott, N. L.; Folkers, J. P.; Whitesides, G. M. Science 1992, 257, 1380-1382.
15. Abbott, N. L.; Rolison, D. R.; Whitesides, G. M. Langmuir 1994, 10, 2672-2682.
16. Drawhorn, R.; Abbott, N. L. J. Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 16511-16515.
17. Miller, W. J.; Abbott, N. L.; Paul, J. D.; Prentiss, M. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1996, 69, 1852-1854.
18. Gupta, V. K.; Miller, W. J.; Pike, C. L.; Abbott, N. L. Chem. Mater. 1996, 8, 1366-1369.
19. Gupta, V. K.; Abbott, N. L. Langmuir 1996, 12, 2587-2593.
20. Gupta, V. K.; Abbott, N. L. Science 1997, 276, 1533-1536.
21. Chidsey, C. E. D.; Loiacono, D. N.; Sleator, T.; Nakahara, S. Surf. Sci. 1988, 200, 45-66.
22. Nuzzo, R. G.; Fusco, F. A.; Allara, D. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1987, 109, 2358-2368.
23. Strong, L.; Whitesides, G. M. Langmuir 1988, 4, 546-558.
24. Widrig, C. A.; Alves, C. A.; Porter, M. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 2805-2810.
25. Chidsey, C. E. D.; Liu, G.-Y.; Rowntree, P.; Scoles, G. J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 91, 4421-4423.
26. Camillone, N., III; Chidsey, C. E. D.; Liu, G.-Y.; Putvinski, T. M.; Scoles, G. J. Chem. Phys. 1991, 94, 8493-8502.
27. Camillone, N., III; Chidsey, C. E. D.; Liu, G.-Y.; Scoles, G. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 4234-4245.
28. Dubois, L. H.; Zegarski, B. R.; Nuzzo, R. G. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 678-688.
29. Samant, M. G.; Brown, C. A.; Gordon, J. G., II. Langmuir 1991, 7, 437-439.
30. Alves, C. A.; Smith, E. L.; Potter, M. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 1222-1227.
31. Nuzzo, R. G.; Korenic, E. M.; Dubois, L. H. J. Chem. Phys. 1990, 93, 767-773.
32. Camillone, N., III; Chidsey, C. E. D.; Liu, G.-Y.; Scoles, G. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 3503-3511.
33. Fenter, P.; Eisenberger, P.; Liang, K. S. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1993, 70, 2447-2450.
34. Fenter, P.; Eberhardt, A.; Eisenberger, P. Science 1994, 266, 1216-1218.
35. Poirier, G. E.; Tarlov, M. J. Langmuir 1994, 10, 2853-2856.
36. Ulman, A.; Eilers, J. E.; Tilman, N. Langmuir 1989, 5, 1147-1152.
37. Wunderlich, B. Macromolecular Physics; Academic Press: New York, 1973; Chapter II.
38. Allara, D. L.; Nuzzo, R. G. Langmuir 1985, 1, 52-66.
39. Nuzzo, R. G.; Dubois, L. H.; Allara, D. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 558-569.
40. Laibinis, P.E.; Whitesides, G.M.; Allara, D.L.; Tao, Y.-T.; Parikh, A. N.; Nuzzo, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 7152-7167.
41. Gerdy, J. J.; Goodard, W. A., III. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 3233-3236.
42. Troughton, E. B.; Bain, C. D.; Whitesides, G.M. Langmuir 1988, 4, 365-385.
43. 3
44. Martin, C. R. Science 1994, 266, 1961-1966.
45. Reference 1, Chapter 17.
46. Snyder, R. G.; Hsu, S. L.; Krimm, S. Spectrochim. Acta 1978, 34A, 395-406.
47. Rabolt, J. F.; Burns, F. C.; Schlotter, N. E.; Swalen, J. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1983, 78, 946-952.
48. We also found that electroless gold (∼100 nm) deposited on a thin film of evaporated gold (5 nm, with 1 nm titanium) has nearly the same diffraction pattern as evaporated gold.
49. Jenkins, R.; Snyder, R. L. Introduction to X-ray Powder Diffractometry; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1996.
50. MacGillavry, C. H.; Rieck, G. D., Eds. International Tables for X-ray Crystallography; Kynoch Press: Birmingham, England, 1962; Vol. III, pp 157-163.
51. Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards (JCPDS)-International Center for Diffraction Data, 1996, File No. 04-0784.
52. The angle of incidence (θ) of the X-rays ranged from 15° to 45°. The depth of penetration of the X-rays into gold is estimatesd to be 0.4- 1.2 μm. This value is larger than the thickness of the gold films (50-100 nm). Thus, the diffraction patterns in Figure 3 give information about the structure of the bulk of the gold films. If the structure of the gold film is assumed to be uniform throughout the thickness of the film, the crystallographic orientations presented at the surface can be estimated from diffraction from the bulk film.
53. Bain, C. D.; Whitesides, G. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 5897-5898.
54. Ferguson, G. S.; Whitesides, G. M. In Modern Approaches to Wettability: Theory and Applications; Schrader, M. E., Loeb, G. I., Eds.; Plenum Press: New York, 1992; pp 150-157.
55. Miller, W. J.; Abbott, N. L. Langmuir 1997, 13, 7106-7114.
56. All gold samples with or without postdeposition treatments are rinsed with alcohol before immersion in solutions of alkanethiols.
57. Reference 12, pp 48-58.
58. We do not report measurements of water contact angles here. Advancing and receding contact angles of water are affected by surface roughness in a complex manner (see, for example: Dettre, R. H.; Johnson, R. E., Jr. In Contact Angles, Wettability, and Adhesion; Fowkes, F. M., Ed.; Advances in Chemistry Series 43; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1964; pp 136-144). We do not report HD contact angles on SAMs formed on electroless gold on PCTE membranes because HD swells the membrane.
59. Finklea, H. O.; Avery, S.; Lynch, M.; Furtsch, T. Langmuir 1987, 3, 409-413.
60. Sabatani, E.; Rubinstein, I. J. Phys. Chem. 1987, 91, 6663-6669.
61. Chidsey, C. E. D.; Loiacono, D. N. Langmuir 1990, 6, 682-691.
62. Angerstein-Kozlowska, H.; Conway, B. E.; Hamelin, A.; Stoicoviciu, L. J. Electroanal. Chem. 1987, 228, 429-453.
63. Strbac, S.; Adzic, R. R.; Hamelin, A. J. Electroanal. Chem. 1988, 249, 291-310.
64. Greenler, R. G. J. Chem. Phys. 1966, 44, 310-314.
65. 35 The intensities of peaks in the IR spectra give information about the orientation of alkyl chains averaged over the entire region on the sample covered by the IR beam. Here we neglect the effects of surface roughness.
66. Allara, D.L.; Swalen, J. D. J. Phys. Chem. 1982, 86, 2700-2704.
67. Allara, D. L. In Characterization of Organic Thin Films; Ulman, A. Ed.; Butterworth-Heinemann: Boston, 1995; pp 57-86.
68. Sinniah, K.; Cheng, J.; Terrettaz, S.; Reutt-Robey, J.E.; Miller, C. J. J. Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 14500-14505.
69. We summed the intensities of the two peaks corresponding to the symmetric methyl stretching mode. The total intensity is assumed to be conserved during the Fermi resonance interactions between the fundamental symmetric methylene stretch and the anharmonic methyl deformation (Hill, I. R.; Levin, I. W. J. Chem. Phys. 1979, 70, 842-851). The intensity of the latter is small compared to that of the former and thus can be neglected ( Herzberg, G. F. R. S. C. Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure: II. Infrared and Raman Spectra of Polyatomic Molecules; Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: New York, 1945; pp 239-241).
70. We summed the intensities of the two peaks corresponding to the symmetric methyl stretching mode. The total intensity is assumed to be conserved during the Fermi resonance interactions between the fundamental symmetric methylene stretch and the anharmonic methyl deformation (Hill, I. R.; Levin, I. W. J. Chem. Phys. 1979, 70, 842-851). The intensity of the latter is small compared to that of the former and thus can be neglected ( Herzberg, G. F. R. S. C. Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure: II. Infrared and Raman Spectra of Polyatomic Molecules; Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: New York, 1945; pp 239-241).
71. 39,40.
72. 0 (I) where the subcript 0 denotes the SAM on evaporated gold. Using the absolute intensities (not the normalized intensities in Table 4) and the above procedure suggested by the reviewer, the tilt angle of chains on electroless gold deposited on high-index glass was estimated to be 21°. This value is the same as that estimated using the second procedure shown in the text. We do not, however, recommend the above method because it requires a direct comparison of the absolute intensities. An assumption in eq I is that the proportionality constant in eq 6 is the same for all samples. We have observed the proportionality constant in eq 6 not to be the same for spectra measured on evaporated gold and electroless gold. In contrast to the referee's approach, our approach compares the ratios of intensities within a given spectrum to those of a second spectrum. This approach avoids the errors caused by a direct comparison of absolute intensities.