Evolution of the interface and metal film morphology in the vapor deposition of Ti on hexadecanethiolate hydrocarbon monolayers on Au

Journal of Physical Chemistry B

Volumn 109, Issue 44, 2005, Pages 21006-21014

  Tighe, Timothy B ^a   Daniel, Thomas A ^a   Zhu, Zihua ^a   Uppili, Sundarajan ^a   Winograd, Nicholas ^a   Allara, David L ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTACT AREA; INTERFACE CHEMISTRY; METAL MORPHOLOGY; SCATTERED REACTION;

GOLD; INTERFACES (MATERIALS); MONOLAYERS; MORPHOLOGY; SECONDARY ION MASS SPECTROMETRY; STOICHIOMETRY; TITANIUM; VAPOR DEPOSITION; X RAY PHOTOELECTRON SPECTROSCOPY;

METALLIC FILMS;

EID: 28144437065     PISSN: 15206106     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jp054174k     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Jung, D. R.; Czandema, A. W. Crit. Rev. Solid State 1994, 19, 1-54.
2. Herdt, G. C.; King, D. E.; Czandema, A. W. Z. Phys. Chem. 1997, 202, 163-196.
3. Hooper, A.; Fisher, G. L.; Konstadinidis, K.; Jung, D.; Nguyen, H.; Opila, R.; Collins, R. W.; Winograd, N.; Allara, D. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 8052-8064.
4. Fisher, G. L.; Hooper, A. E.; Opila, R. L.; Allara, D. L.; Winograd, N. J. Phys. Chem. B 2000, 104, 3267-3273.
5. Fisher, G. L.; Walker, A. V.; Hooper, A. E.; Tighe, T. B.; Bahnck, K. B.; Skriba, H. T.; Reinard, M. D.; Haynie, B. C.; Opila, R. L.; Winograd, N.; Allara, D. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 5528-5541.
6. Walker, A. V.; Tighe, T. B.; Reinard, M. D.; Haynie, B. C.; Allara, D. L.; Winograd, N. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2003, 369, 615-620.
7. Walker, A. V.; Tighe, T. B.; Stapleton, J.; Haynie, B. C.; Upilli, S.; Allara, D. L.; Winograd, N. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004, 84, 4008-4010.
8. Walker, A. V.; Tighe, T. B.; Cabarcos, O. M.; Reinard, M. D.; Haynie, B. C.; Uppili, S.; Winograd, N.; Allara, D. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 3954-3963.
9. Zhou, C.; Deshpande, M. R.; Reed, M. A.; Jones, L.; Tour, J. M. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1997, 71, 611-613.
10. Collet, J.; Vuillame, D. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1998, 73, 2681-2693.
11. Allara, D. L.; Dunbar, T. D.; Weiss, P. S.; Bumm, L. A.; Cygan, M. T.; Tour, J. M.; Reinerth, W. A.; Yao, Y.; Kozaki, M.; Jones, L. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1998, 852, 349-370.
12. Collier, C. P.; Wong, E. W.; Belohradsky, M.; Raymo, F. M.; Stoddart, J. F.; Kuekes, P. J.; Williams, R. S.; Heath, J. R. Science 1999, 285, 391-394.
13. Chen, J.; Reed, M. A.; Rawlett, A. M.; Tour, J. M. Science 1999, 286, 1550-1552.
14. Chen, J.; Wang, W.; Reed, M. A.; Rawlett, A. M.; Price, D. W.; Tour, J. M. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2000, 77, 1224-1226.
15. Reed, M. A.; Chen, J.; Rawlett, A. M.; Price, D. W.; Tour, J. M. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2001, 78, 3735-3737.
16. Collier, C. P.; Mattersteig, G.; Wong, E. W.; Luo, Y.; Beverly, K.; Sampaio, J.; Raymo, F. M.; Stoddart, J. F.; Heath, J. R. Science 2000, 289, 1172-1175.
17. Collier, C. P.; Jeppesen, J. O.; Luo, Y.; Perkins, J.; Wong, E. W.; Heath, J. R.; Stoddart, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 12632-12641.
18. Metzger, R. M.; Xu, T.; Peterson, I. R. J. Phys. Chem. B 2001, 105, 7280-7290.
19. Chen, J.; Reed, M. A. Chem. Phys. 2002, 287, 127-145.
20. Chang, S. C.; Li, Z. Y.; Lau, C. N.; Larade, B.; Williams, R. S. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2003, 83, 3198-3200.
21. Vuillaume, D.; Lenfant, S. Microelectron. Eng. 2003, 70, 539-550.
22. Lenfant, S.; Krzeminski, C.; Delerue, C.; Allan, G.; Vuillaume, D. Nano Lett. 2003, 3, 741-746.
23. (a) McCreery, R.; Dieringer, J.; Solak, A. O.; Snyder, B.; Nowak, A. M.; McGovern, W. R.; DuVall, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 10748-10758.
24. (b) McCreery, R.; Dieringer, J.; Solak, A. O.; Snyder, B.; Nowak, A. M.; McGovern, W. R.; DuVall, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 6200.
25. de Boer, B.; Frank, M. M.; Chabal, Y. J.; Jiang, W. R.; Garfunkel, E.; Bao, Z. Langmuir 2004, 20, 1539-1542.
26. Jung, G. Y.; Ganapathiappan, S.; Li, X.; Ohlberg, D. A. A.; Olynick, D. L.; Chen, Y.; Tong, W. M.; Williams, R. S. Appl. Phys. A 2004, 78, 1169-1173.
27. McCreery, R. L. Chem. Mater. 2004, 16, 4477-4496.
28. Stewart, D. R.; Ohlberg, D. A. A.; Beck, P. A.; Chen, Y.; Williams, R. S.; Jeppesen, J. O.; Nielsen, K. A.; Stoddart, J. F. Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 133-136.
29. Lau, C. N.; Stewart, D. R.; Williams, R. S.; Bockrath, M. Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 569-572.
30. Haick, H.; Ambrico, M.; Ghabboun, J.; Ligonzo, T.; Cahen, D. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2004, 6, 4538-4541.
31. Konstadinidis, K.; Taylor, A. J.; Miller, A. C.; Opila, R. L. J. Adhes. 1994, 46, 197-213.
32. Tachibana, T.; Williams, B. E.; Glass, J. T. Phys. Rev. B 1992, 45, 11975-11981.
33. Bodo, P.; Sundgren, J. E. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 1984, 2, 1498-1502.
34. Bodo, P.; Sundgren, J. E. J. Appl. Phys. 1986, 60, 1161-1168.
35. Ohuchi, F. S.; Freilich, S. C. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 1986, 4, 1039-1045.
36. Du, M.; Opila, R. L.; Case, C. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 1998, 16, 155-162.
37. Konstadinidis, K.; Zhang, P.; Opila, R. L.; Allara, D. L. Surf. Sci. 1995, 338, 300-312.
38. (a) Thran, A: Zaporojtchenko, V.; Faupel, F. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1999, 82, 1903-1906.
39. (b) Zaporojtchenko, V.; Behnke, K.; Strunskus, T.; Faupel, F. Surf. Sci. 2000, 454, 412-416.
40. Allara, D. L.; Nuzzo, R. G. Langmuir 1985, 1, 52-66.
41. Nuzzo, R. G.; Dubois, L. H.; Allara, D. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 558-569.
42. 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.
43. MacPhail, R. A.; Strauss, H. L.; Snyder, R. G.; Elliger, C. A. J. Phys. Chem. 1984, 88, 334-341.
44. Laibinis, P. E.; Nuzzo, R. G.; Whitesides, G. M. J. Phys. Chem. 1992, 96, 5097-5105.
45. Braun, R. M.; Blenkinsopp, P.; Mullock, S. J.; Corlett, C.; Willey, K. F.; Vickerman, J. C.; Winograd, N. Rapid Commun. Mass. Spectrom. 1998, 12, 1246-1252.
46. Other imaging modes were considered but were ultimately not possible to apply in our experiments. For example, in the case of tapping mode, where the cantilever is oscillated in the Z direction, vacuum conditions cause the cantilever resonance frequency to become too sharp to accommodate the surface-tip force-induced frequency shifts that allow imaging [for example, see, Garcia, R.; Perez, R. Dynamic Atomic Force Microscopy Measurements. Surf. Sci. Rep. 2002, 47, 197-301]. The much less common, noncontact methods might be useful but this capability was not in operation in our system at the time of the experiments. Preliminary trials are now being planned to evaluate this mode for our application.
47. M = ±0.02. The SAM-functionalized QCM crystal and Au reference crystals were placed side by side, the same distance from the deposition source and the sample QCM holder temperature controlled at ∼25°C (the approximate SAM sample temperatures in the actual analysis experiments) by use of circulated water. The SAM QCM crystals (Cold Springs R&D, Syracuse, NY) were highly polished on one side to an rms roughness (tapping mode AFM) of 0.1-0.2 nm, which resulted in the QCM SAM surfaces having near identical rms roughnesses to those of the SAMs prepared on silicon substrates. Both QCMs had movable shutters to independently control access of the metal flux to the surfaces. Just prior to a set of measurements, the sample was blocked while the reference shutter was opened to allow the Ti flux to strike the reference QCM surface and condense many layers of Ti to provide a fresh Ti surface with unit efficiency in condensing Ti atoms. Subsequently both shutters were opened to make continuous measurements of the total flux delivered (reference QCM) and the amount condensed on the SAM.
48. Sticking probabilities were estimated from the area ratios of the metal core level peaks to the Au 4f and C 1s peaks by use of instrument-determined cross sections [e.g., see Briggs, D.; Grant, J. T., Eds. Surface Analysis by Auger and X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy; IM Publications: West Sussex, U.K., 2003]. Estimates were not made above 9 = 10 because of the increasing uncertainty in applying the necessary photoelectron mean free path corrections to the heterogeneous Ti films with varying thicknesses of metal across the surface (e.g., as shown by our AFM data).
49. Georgiev, D. G.; Baird, R. J.; Newaz, G.; Auner, G.; Witte, R.; Herfurth, H. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2004, 236, 71-76.
50. Wagner, C. D.; Naumkin, A. V.; Kraut-Vass, A.; Allison, J. W.; Powell, C. J., Rumble, J. R. Eds. NIST X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy Database 20, version 3.4 (Web version); National Institute of Standards and Technology: Gaithersburg, MD, 2003.
51. Schmiedgen, M.; Graat, P. C. J.; Baretzky, B.: Mittemeijer, E. J. Thin Solid Films 2002, 415, 114-122.
52. In general, because of the heterogeneous nature of the deposited Ti (e.g., see AFM data), quantitative analysis of the various core level peaks in the XPS spectra was not performed.
53. Parikh, A. N.; Allara, D. L. J. Chem. Phys. 1992, 96, 927-945.
54. Strunksus, T.; Grunze, M.; Kochendoerfer, G.; Wöll, Ch. Langmuir 1996, 12, 2712-2725.
55. It is interesting to note that if there were a kinetic isotope effect for Ti reaction with a C-H(D) bond, one would expect that the C-D bonds would be attacked more slowly (by factors reaching as high as nearly half an order of magnitude), all other factors being equal. For such an isotope effect, one would expect in the case of a fully protiated molecule that the top part of the SAM would react even more rapidly (selectively) compared to the bottom part than indicated in Figure 3 for the molecule with the deuterated top.
56. Poirier, G. E.; Tarlov, M. J. Langmuir 1994, 10, 2853-2856.
57. Delamarche, E.; Michel, B.; Gerber, C.; Anselmetti, D.; Guntherodt, H. J.; Wolf, H.; Ringsdorf, H. Langmuir 1994, 10, 2869-2871.