Voltage-induced dependence of Raman-active modes in single-wall carbon nanotube thin films

Nano Letters

Volumn 7, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 1129-1133

  Fanchini, Giovanni ^a   Unalan, Husnu Emrah ^a   Chhowalla, Manish ^a  

^a Rutgers The State University of New Jersey   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KOHN ANOMALIES; RAMAN MEASUREMENTS; RAMAN-ACTIVE OPTICAL BRANCHES;

ELECTRIC FIELD EFFECTS; JOULE HEATING; RAMAN SCATTERING; SINGLE-WALLED CARBON NANOTUBES (SWCN); THIN FILM TRANSISTORS;

THIN FILMS;

EID: 34249744735     PISSN: 15306984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/nl062418m     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Hu, L.; et al. Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 2513.
2. Fanchini, G.; et al. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89, 191919.
3. Dresselhaus, M. D.; Eklund, P. C. Adv. Phys. 2000, 49, 705.
4. Snow, E. S.; et al. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2003, 82, 2145.
5. Zhou, Y.; et al. Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 2031.
6. Seidel, R.; et al. Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 831.
7. Takenobu, T.; et al. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 88, 033511.
8. Wu, Z.; et al. Science 2004, 305, 1273.
9. Unalan, H. E.; et al. Nano Lett. 2006, 6, 2513.
10. Thomsen, H.; Reich, S. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 85, 5214.
11. Worlock, J. M.; Fleury, P. A. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1967, 19, 1176.
12. Corio, P.; et al. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2003, 370, 675;
13. 2004, 392 396.
14. Okazaki, K.; et al. Phys. Rev. B 2003, 68, 035434.
15. Hartman, A. Z.; et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 236804.
16. See Supporting Information.
17. Lazzeri, M.; et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 95, 236802.
18. Piscanec, S.; et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 93, 185503.
19. Ashcroft, N. W.; Mermin, N. D. Solid State Physics; Saunders: Philadelphia, 1976; p 323.
20. Dressel, M.; Grüner, G. Electrodynamics of Solids; Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, 2002.
21. Ferrari, A. C.; Robertson, Phys. Rev. B 2000, 61, 14095.
22. Pisana, S.; et al. Nat. Mat. 2007,6, 198. See arXiv:cond-mat/0611714.
23. Popov, V. N.; Lambin, P. Phys. Rev. B 2006, 73, 085507.
24. Ashcroft, N. W.; Mermin, N. D. Solid State Physics; ref 17, 1976; p 515.
25. F, and y = mwlnq so that Kohn anomalies (x = 1) correspond, in the absence of field, to an infinite static response ∈ (0,0) - 1→ ∞ and a null dynamic response ∈(0, ℏw) -1 = 0 while, in the presence of field, ∈(△k, 0) - 1→ ∞.
26. Actually, the use of the Lindhard model relies on the adiabatic Born-Oppenheimer approximation which, as verified below, still holds in our SWNT thin films. In contrast, our adiabatic model will be inadequate in nonadiabatic systems (e.g., graphene).
27. Ashcroft, N. W.; Mermin, N. D. Reference 22, pp 513-523.
28. Uchida, T.; et al. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2004, 400, 341.
29. Zhou, Z.; et al. J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 1206. Nevertheless, while the changes achieved including possible anharmonic effects in our model are low, the influence on the electron screening of the alternating electric fields used for Raman excitation might also be considerable. This would suggest that our model might also be useful in explaining the temperature dependence of the Raman peaks of SWNT thin films in the absence of a constant external field.
30. -15 s. We suspect that especially intertube processes between one m-SWNT and one s-SWNT are important in lowering the relaxation times, since s-SWNTs may act as thermal sink (ref 15). Thus, the higher the participation of s-SWNTs to electrical transport, the smaller TINTER. Impurities might also contribute in decreasing both intra- and intertube relaxation times.
31. u∥ and u∝ represent, in each SWNT, the modes polarization longitudinal and transversal to the electric field.
32. Barker, A. S.; Loudon, R. Rev. Mod. Phys. 1972, 44, 18.
33. Fanchini, G.; et al. J. Appl. Phys. 2002, 91, 1155.
34. Zhang, Y.; et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006, 96, 136806.
35. Telg, H.; et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 93, 177401.
36. Jhi, S-H.; et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 85, 1710.