Microdomain ordering in laterally confined block copolymer thin films

Macromolecules

Volumn 40, Issue 26, 2007, Pages 9570-9581

  Bosse, August W ^a,b   García Cervera, Carlos J ^a   Fredrickson, Glenn H ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c University of California   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MICRODOMAIN LATTICE; MICRODOMAIN ORDERING;

ANNEALING; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HOMOPOLYMERIZATION; POLYMER FILMS; THIN FILMS;

BLOCK COPOLYMERS;

EID: 38349161007     PISSN: 00249297     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ma071866t     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Park, C.; Yoon, J.; Thomas, E. L. Polymer 2003, 44, 6725.
2. Segalman, R. A. Mater. Sci. Eng. R 2005, 48, 191.
3. Cheng, J. Y.; Ross, C. A.; Smith, H. I.; Thomas, E. L. Adv. Mater. 2006, 18, 2505.
4. Segalman, R. A.; Hexemer, A.; Hayward, R. C.; Kramer, E. J. Macromolecules 2003, 36, 3111.
5. Segalman, R. A.; Hexemer, A.; Kramer, E. J. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003, 91, 196101.
6. Segalman, R. A.; Hexemer, A.; Kramer, E. J. Macromolecules 2003, 36, 6831.
7. Angelescu, D. E.; Harrison, C. K.; Trawick, M. L.; Register, R. A.; Chaikin, P. M. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 95, 025702.
8. Kramer, E. J. Nature (London) 2005, 437, 824.
9. Naito, K.; Hieda, H.; Sakurai, M.; Kamata, Y.; Asakawa, K. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2002, 38, 1949.
10. Guarini, K. W.; Black, C. T.; Zhang, Y.; Kim, H.; Sikorski, E. M.; Babich, I. V. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 2002, 20, 2788.
11. Black, C. T.; Guarini, K. W.; Zhang, Y.; Kim, H.; Benedict, J.; Sikorski, E.; Babich, I. V.; Milkove, K. R. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 2004, 25, 622.
12. Cheng, J. Y.; Mayes, A. M.; Ross, C. A. Nat. Mater. 2004, 3, 823.
13. Cheng, J. Y.; Zhang, F.; Smith, H. I.; Vancso, G. J.; Ross, C. A. Adv. Mater. 2006, 18, 597.
14. Cheng, J. Y.; Zhang, F.; Chuang, V. P.; Mayes, A. M.; Ross, C. A. Nano Lett. 2006, 6, 2099.
15. Hexemer, A.; Stein, G.; Kramer, E.; Magonov, S. Macromolecules 2005, 38, 7083.
16. Stein, G.; Kramer, E.; Li, X.; Wang, J. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007, 98, 086101.
17. Stein, G.; Lee, W.; Fredrickson, G.; Kramer, E.; Li, X.; Wang, J. Macromolecules 2007, 40, 5791.
18. Roerdink, M.; Hempenius, M.; Gunst, U.; Arlinghaus, H.; Vancso, G. Small 2007, 3, 1415.
19. Stein, G. E.; Onikoyi, A.; Kramer, E. J. Private communication, 2006.
20. Fredrickson, G. H. The Equilibrium Theory of Inhomogenous Polymers; Clarendon Press: Oxford, U.K., 2006.
21. Matsen, M. W. J. Chem. Phys. 1997, 106, 7781.
22. Fredrickson, G. H.; Ganesan, V.; Drolet, F. Macromolecules 2002, 35, 16.
23. Fredrickson, G. H. J. Chem. Phys. 2002, 117, 6810.
24. Maurits, N.; Fraaije, J. J. Chem. Phys. 1997, 107, 5879.
25. Tzeremes, G.; Rasmussen, K. O.; Lookman, T.; Saxena, A. Phys. Rev. E 2002, 65, 041806.
26. Rasmussen, K. O.; Kalosakas, G. J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 2002, 40, 1777.
27. Sakurai, J. J. Modern Quantum Mechanics, Revised Edition; Addison Wesley: Reading, MA, 1994.
28. Ceniceros, H. D.; Fredrickson, G. H. Multiscale Modeling Simul. 2004, 2, 452.
29. Drolet, F.; Fredrickson, G. H. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1999, 83, 4317.
30. Leibler, L. Macromolecules 1980, 13, 1602.
31. Fredrickson, G. H.; Binder, K. J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 91, 7265.
32. Hohenberg, P. C.; Swift, J. B. Phys. Rev. E 1995, 52, 1828.
33. Fredrickson, G. H. Macromolecules 1987, 20, 2535.
34. Tang, H.; Freed, K. F. J. Chem. Phys. 1992, 97, 4496.
35. Turner, M. S.; Rubinstein, M.; Marques, C. M. Macromolecules 1994, 27, 4986.
36. Brown, G.; Chakrabarti, A. J. Chem. Phys. 1994, 101, 3310.
37. Binder, K. Acta Polym. 1995, 46, 204.
38. Binder, K.; Frisch, H. L.; Stepanow, S. J. Phys. II 1997, 7, 1353.
39. Throughout this paper we will often use the terms "A block" and "majority block" interchangeably. Clearly, the identification of the majority block depends on the specification of f; however, in this study the value of f is fixed at f = 0.7 and thus we identify the A block as the majority block.
40. This total run time estimate does not include the test/control runs with 37 enclosed microdomains presented in section 3.4. The results presented in section 3.4 required 855 additional simulations, each requiring approximately 4 h of runtime on a dedicated compute node. This amounts to an additional 3420 compute-hours for a total of 9965 total compute-hours (equal to approximately 415 compute-days).