Electrostatic deflections and electromechanical resonances of carbon nanotubes

Science

Volumn 283, Issue 5407, 1999, Pages 1513-1516

  Poncharal, Philippe ^a   Wang, Z L ^b   Ugarte, Daniel ^c   De Heer, Walt A ^a  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

^c LABORATÓRIO NACIONAL DE LUZ SÍNCROTRON   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARBON;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; FREQUENCY MODULATION; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; VIBRATION; WAVEFORM;

EID: 0033525774     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.283.5407.1513     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. S. Iijima, Nature 354, 56 (1991).
2. J. W. Mintmire, B. I. Dunlap, C. T. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 631 (1992).
3. M. S. Dresselhaus, C. Dresselhaus, R Saito, Carbon 33, 883 (1995).
4. D. L. Carroll et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2811 (1997).
5. T. W. Ebbesen, Phys. Today 49, 26 (1996).
6. W. A. de Heer, A. Chatelain, D. Ugarte, Science 270, 1179 (1995).
7. S. Frank, P. Poncharal, Z. L. Wang, W. A. de Heer, ibid. 280, 1744 (1998).
8. J. Liu et al., ibid., p. 1253.
9. A. Thess et al., ibid. 273, 483 (1996).
10. D. H. Robertson, D. W. Brenner, J. W. Mintmire, Phys. Rev. B 45, 12592 (1992).
11. R. S. Ruoff and D. C. Lorents, Carbon 33, 925 (1995).
12. M. M. Treacy, T. W. Ebbesen, J. M. Gibson, Nature 38, 678 (1996).
13. B. I. Yakobson, C. J. Brabec, J. Bernholc, Phys. Rev: Lett. 76, 2511 (1996).
14. M. R. Falvo et al., Nature 389, 582 (1997).
15. J. P. Lu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1297 (1997).
16. E. Wong, P. Sheehan, C. Lieber, Science 277, 1971 (1997).
17. C.-H. Kiang et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1869 (1998).
18. W. H. Knechte et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1961 (1998).
19. S. Iijima, C. Brabeck, A. Maiti, J. Bernholc, J. Chem. Phys. 104, 2089 (1996).
20. T. Kuzumaki et al., Phil. Mag. A 77, 1461 (1998).
21. J.-P. Salvetat et al., Adv. Mat., in press.
22. N. Yao and V. Lordi, J. Appl. Phys. 84, 1939 (1998).
23. G. Gau, T. Cagin, W. A. Goddard, Nanotechnology 9, 184 (1998).
24. B. T. Kelly, Physics of Graphite (Applied Science, London, 1981).
25. N. Osakabe et al., Appl. Phys. Lett, 70, 940 (1997).
26. T. W. Ebbesen and P. M. Ajayan, Nature 358, 220 (1992). We caution that different production recipes can yield different results; in particular, defect densities may vary substantially from one laboratory to the next (as is the case with crystal growing). For example, catalytically grown tubes are usually very defective. In contrast, the nanotube material used in this work [including (31)] was from the same stock as was used in our previous work (6, 7) and was of high quality.
27. The TEM used was a JEOL 100C (100 kV) at the School of Materials Science and Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology.
28. D. J. Griffiths and Y. Li, Am. J. Phys. 64, 706 (1996).
29. L. Meirovich, Elements of Vibration Analysis (McGraw-Hill, New York, ed. 2, 1986).
30. Di was not measured for all nanotubes, and in those cases it was not included in the calculations. However, the value for E is rather insensitive to Di, because Di/D = 1/4, which is an extreme case, differs only by 7% as compared with Di = 0.
31. Microscopy was performed with a Philips CM30 200-kV high-resolution TEM.
32. The ripple mode may be a precursor to buckling, but it should not be confused with bucking. Buckling (in contrast to rippling) is characterized as an instability giving rise to a nonlinear response. It occurs in highly stressed nanotubes (and beams) and manifests as one or several kinks with very small radii of curvature (about 1 to 10 nm). It is accompanied by abrupt change in the effective force constant and may cause irreversible damage. The observed effect may be related to the rippling found in classical beams as a precursor to buckling [see S. Kyriakides and G. T. Ju, Int. J. Solids Struct. 29, 1117 (1992)].
33. 11.
34. D. Ugarte, Nature 352, 707 (1992).
35. Lord Kelvin, Philos. Mag. 46, 82 (1898).
36. N. A. Sulpice and R. J. D'Arcy, J. Phys. E 3, 477 (1970).
37. Electrical charging due to the electron beam cannot account for the effect, because the charge found to reside on the nanotubes is positive rather than negative. Furthermore, the amplitude of vibration at resonance does not change with electron dose, as it would if electron beam charging were important.
38. M. Gurgoze, J. Sound Vib. 190, 149 (1996).
39. We thank U. Landman, R. L. Whetten, L. Forro, and A. Zangwill for fruitful discussion and R. Nitsche for his analysis of the static bent nanotube. D.U. thanks the Centre Interdepartemental de Microscopy Electronique, Ecole Polytechnique Federale, for the use of the Philips CM30 microscope for Fig. 3, B through D, and the Brazilian Council for Scientific and Technological Research. Supported by the Army Research Office, grants DAAG 55-97-0133 (W.A.d.H. and P.P.), by NSF9733160 (Z.L.W.), and by NSFDMR-9971412 (W.A.d.H. and Z.L.W.)