4.6 Article

Mechanical properties of monolayer sulphides: a comparative study between MoS2, HfS2 and TiS3

期刊

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 17, 期 41, 页码 27742-27749

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5cp04576b

关键词

-

资金

  1. Flemish Science Foundation (FWO-Vl)
  2. Methusalem foundation of the Flemish government
  3. Hercules foundation
  4. FWO Pegasus-Long Marie Curie Fellowship
  5. FWO Pegasus-Short Marie Curie Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The in-plane stiffness (C), Poisson's ratio (nu), Young's modulus and ultimate strength (sigma) along two different crystallographic orientations are calculated for the single layer crystals: MoS2, HfS2 and TiS3 in 1H, 1T and monoclinic phases. We find that MoS2 and HfS2 have isotropic in-plane stiffnesses of 124.24 N m(-1) and 79.86 N m(-1), respectively. While for TiS3 the in-plane stiffness is highly anisotropic due to its monoclinic structure, with C-x = 83.33 N m(-1) and C-y = 133.56 N m(-1) (x and y are parallel to its longer and shorter in-plane lattice vectors.). HfS2 which is in the 1T phase has the smallest anisotropy in its ultimate strength, whereas TiS3 in the monoclinic phase has the largest. Along the armchair direction MoS2 has the largest sigma of 23.48 GPa, whereas along y TiS3 has the largest sigma of 18.32 GPa. We have further analyzed the band gap response of these materials under uniaxial tensile strain, and find that they exhibit different behavior. Along both armchair and zigzag directions, the band gap of MoS2 (HfS2) decreases (increases) as strain increases, and the response is almost isotropic. For TiS3, the band gap decreases when strain is along x, while if strain is along y, the band gap increases first and then decreases beyond a threshold strain value. The different characteristics observed in these sulphides with different structures shed light on the relationship between the structure and properties, which is useful for applications in nanotechnology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据