4.4 Article

Thin PTCDA films on Si(001): 1. Growth mode

期刊

SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 572, 期 1, 页码 23-31

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.susc.2004.08.031

关键词

atomic force microscopy; low energy electron diffraction (LEED); molecular beam epitaxy; X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy; near edge extended X-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAFS); silicon; growth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have studied the interface and thin film formation of the organic molecular semiconductor 3,4,9, 10 perylene tetracarboxylic dianhydride (PTCDA) on clean and on hydrogen passivated Si(001) surfaces. The studies were made by means of high resolution X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (HRXPS), near edge X-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAFS), low energy electron diffraction (LEED), and atomic force microscopy (AFM). On the passivated surface the LEED pattern is somewhat diffuse but reveals that the molecules grow in several ordered domains with equivalent orientations to the substrate. NEXAFS shows that the molecules are lying flat on the substrate. The Si 2p XPS line shape is not affected when the film is deposited so it can be concluded that the interaction at the interface between PTCDA and the substrate is weak. The evolution of the film formation appears to be homogeneous for the first monolayer with a nearly complete coverage of flat lying molecules based on the XPS attenuation. For layer thickness of 0.5-2 monolayers (ML) the molecules start to form islands, attracting the molecules in between, leaving the substrate partly uncovered. For thicker films there is a Stranski-Krastanov growth mode with thick islands and a monolayer thick film in between. For the clean surface the ordering of the film is much lower and angle resolved photoelectron spectroscopy (ARPES) of the molecular orbitals have only a small dependence of the emission angle. NEXAFS shows that the molecules do not lie flat on the surface and also reveal a chemical interaction at the interface. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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