4.6 Article

Response of Bilayer and Trilayer Graphene to High-Energy Heavy Ion Irradiation

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma16041332

关键词

ion irradiation; graphene; Raman spectroscopy; defects

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High-energy heavy ion irradiation is an effective method for nanostructuring 2D materials by introducing controlled defects. It is particularly attractive for mass production of graphene nanomembranes, as nanopore size and density can be easily adjusted through ion irradiation parameters. Understanding the mechanisms of nanopore formation due to high-energy heavy ion impact is crucial. In this study, Raman spectroscopy was used to examine the response of bilayer and trilayer graphene to irradiation. Analysis of spectra obtained from various ion beams revealed that damage production efficiency is strongly correlated with nuclear energy loss and the contribution of electronic energy loss to damage formation is minimal.
High-energy heavy ion irradiation is a very useful tool for the nanostructuring of 2D materials because defects can be introduced in a controlled way. This approach is especially attractive for the mass production of graphene nanomembranes when nanopore size and density can easily be tuned by ion irradiation parameters such as ion energy and applied fluence. Therefore, understanding the basic mechanisms in nanopore formation due to high-energy heavy ion impact is of the highest importance. In the present work, we used Raman spectroscopy to investigate the response of bilayer and trilayer graphene to this type of irradiation. Spectra obtained from graphene samples irradiated with 1.8 MeV I, 23 MeV I, 3 MeV Cu, 18 MeV Cu, and 12 MeV Si beams were analysed using the Lucchese model. It was found that the efficiency of damage production scales strongly with nuclear energy loss. Therefore, even for the most energetic 23 MeV I beam, the electronic energy loss does not contribute much to damage formation and ion tracks are unlikely to be formed.

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