Advertisement

Characterizing the Interfacial Behavior of 2D Materials: a Review

  • K.M. LiechtiEmail author
Article

Abstract

Here we review how the interactions of graphene and other 2D materials with their growth and any target substrates have been characterized. Quantifying such interactions is particularly useful for modeling the transfer of the 2D materials to other substrates. It should also help model the assembly of structures made of 2D materials. Distinction is made between direct and indirect methods of extracting the traction-separation relations, which are the continuum representation of the functional form of the interactions between the 2D material and the substrate of interest. Salient features of traction-separation relations include the energy, strength and range of the interaction being considered. Adhesion and separation energies have been the hallmark of linearly elastic fracture mechanics characterizations in the past. The additional information on the strength and range of interactions provided by the measured traction-separation relations allows closer reference to the force fields associated with them and help with the identification of mechanisms. It should also spur theoretical developments to account for some of the interesting features that are being observed.

Keywords

2D materials Interfacial behavior Traction-separation relations Cohesive zone modeling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author’s work on characterizing the interactions between 2D materials and substrates has been supported by the National Science Foundation through grants CMMI-1130261, EAGER 1444398, and Cooperative Agreement No. EEC-1160494. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. While there have been many collaborators, very fruitful interactions with Professors Deji Akinwande, Roger Bonnecaze, Rod Ruoff and Rui Huang and Dr. Seung Ryul Na (PhD student and Post-Doctoral Fellow) stand out.

References

  1. 1.
    Yoon T, Shin WC, Kim TY, Mun JH, Kim TS, Cho BJ (2012) Direct measurement of adhesion energy of monolayer graphene as-grown on copper and its application to renewable transfer process. Nano Lett 12(3):1448–1452Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Na SR, Suk JW, Tao L, Akinwande D, Ruoff RS, Huang R, Liechti KM (2015) Selective mechanical transfer of graphene from seed copper foil using rate effects. ACS Nano 9(2):1325–1335Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Na SR, Rahimi S, Tao L, Chou H, Ameri SK, Akinwande D, Liechti KM (2016) Clean graphene interfaces by selective dry transfer for large area silicon integration. Nanoscale 8:7523–7533Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Na SR, Kim Y, Lee C, Liechti KM, Suk JW (2017) Adhesion and self-healing between monolayer molybdenum disulfide and silicon oxide. Sci Rep 7(1):14740Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Walker ES, Na SR, Jung D, March SD, Kim JS, Trivedi T, Li W, Tao L, Lee ML, Liechti KM, Akinwande D, Bank SR (2016) Large-area dry transfer of single-crystalline epitaxial bismuth thin films. Nano Lett 16(11):6931–6938Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Novoselov KS et al (2004) Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films. Science 306(5696):666–669Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zong Z, Chen CL, Dokmeci MR, Wan KT (2010) Direct measurement of graphene adhesion on silicon surface by intercalation of nanoparticles. J Appl Phys 107(2):026104Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bunch JS, Verbridge SS, Alden JS, van der Zande AM, Parpia JM, Craighead HG, McEuen PL (2008) Impermeable atomic membranes from graphene sheets. Nano Lett 8(8):2458–2462Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koenig SP, Boddeti NG, Dunn ML, Bunch JS (2011) Ultrastrong adhesion of graphene membranes. Nat Nanotechnol 6:543–546Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boddeti NG, Koenig SP, Long R, Xiao J, Bunch JS, Dunn ML (2013) Mechanics of adhered, pressurized graphene blisters. J Appl Mech 80(4):040909Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu X, Boddeti NG, Szpunar MR, Wang L, Rodriguez MA, Long R, Xiao J, Dunn ML, Bunch JS (2013) Observation of pull-in instability in graphene membranes under interfacial forces. Nano Lett 13(5):2309–2313Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boddeti NG, Liu X, Long R, Xiao J, Bunch JS, Dunn ML (2013) Graphene blisters with switchable shapes controlled by pressure and adhesion. Nano Lett 13(12):6216–6221Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Suk JW, Kitt A, Magnuson CW, Hao Y, Ahmed S, An J, Swan AK, Goldberg BB, Ruoff RS (2011) Transfer of CVD-grown monolayer graphene onto arbitrary substrates. ACS Nano 5(9):6916–6924Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wan K-T, Mai Y-W (1995) Fracture mechanics of a new blister test with stable crack growth. Acta Metall Mater 43(11):4109–4115Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Allen MG, Senturia SD (1988) Analysis of critical debonding pressures of stressed thin films in the blister test. J Adhes 25:303–315Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang P, Liechti KM, Huang R (2016) Snap transitions of pressurized graphene blisters. J Appl Mech 83(7):071002Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brennan C, Lu N (2015) Interface adhesion between 2D materials and elastomers measured by buckle delamination. In: APS meeting abstractsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cao Z, Wang P, Gao W, Tao L, Suk JW, Ruoff RS, Akinwande D, Huang R, Liechti KM (2014) A blister test for interfacial adhesion of large-scale transferred graphene. Carbon 69:390–400Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang P, Gao W, Cao Z, Liechti KM, Huang R (2013) Numerical analysis of circular graphene bubbles. J Appl Mech 80:040905Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xin H, Borduin R, Jiang W, Liechti KM, Li W (2017) Adhesion energy of as-grown graphene on copper foil with a blister test. Carbon 123:243–249Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yang T et al (2019) Rate-dependent traction-separation relations for a silicon/epoxy interface informed by experiments and bond rupture kinetics. J Mech Phys Solids. In preparationGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rahimi S, Tao L, Chowdhury SF, Park S, Jouvray A, Buttress S, Rupesinghe N, Teo K, Akinwande D (2014) Toward 300 mm wafer-scalable high-performance polycrystalline chemical vapor deposited graphene transistors. ACS Nano 8(10):10471–10479Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang X, Tao L, Hao Y, Liu Z, Chou H, Kholmanov I, Chen S, Tan C, Jayant N, Yu Q, Akinwande D, Ruoff RS (2014) Direct delamination of graphene for high-performance plastic electronics. Small 10(4):694–698Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lee C, Wei X, Kysar JW, Hone J (2008) Measurement of the elastic properties and intrinsic strength of monolayer graphene. Science 321(5887):385–388Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Na SR, Wang X, Piner RD, Huang R, Willson CG, Liechti KM (2016) Cracking of polycrystalline graphene on copper under tension. ACS Nano 10(10):9616–9625Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lupina G, Kitzmann J, Costina I, Lukosius M, Wenger C, Wolff A, Vaziri S, Östling M, Pasternak I, Krajewska A, Strupinski W, Kataria S, Gahoi A, Lemme MC, Ruhl G, Zoth G, Luxenhofer O, Mehr W (2015) Residual metallic contamination of transferred chemical vapor deposited graphene. ACS Nano 9:4776–4785Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Carpick RW, Batteas JD (2004) Scanning probe studies of nanoscale adhesion between solids in the presence of liquids and monolayer films. In: Springer handbook of nanotechnology. Springer, pp 605–629Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Butt H-J, Cappella B, Kappl M (2005) Force measurements with the atomic force microscope: technique, interpretation and applications. Surf Sci Rep 59(1):1–152Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Burnham NA, Dominguez DD, Mowery RL, Colton RJ (1990) Probing the surface forces of monolayer films with an atomic-force microscope. Phys Rev Lett 64(16):1931–1934Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jiang T, Zhu Y (2015) Measuring graphene adhesion using atomic force microscopy with a microsphere tip. Nanoscale 7(24):10760–10766Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Johnson KL, Kendall K, Roberts AD (1971) Surface energy and the contact of elastic solids. Proc R Soc Lond A Math Phys Sci 324(1558):301–313Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Derjaguin RV, Muller VM, Toporov YP (1975) Effect of contact deformations on the adhesion of particles. J Colloid Interface Sci 53:314–326Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Maugis D (1992) Adhesion of spheres: the JKR-DMT transition using a Dugdale model. J Colloid Interface Sci 150(1):243–269Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Heim L-O, Blum J, Preuss M, Butt HJ (1999) Adhesion and friction forces between spherical micrometer-sized particles. Phys Rev Lett 83(16):3328–3331Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ducker WA, Senden TJ, Pashley RM (1991) Direct measurement of colloidal forces using an atomic force microscope. Nature 353(6341):239–241Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jacobs TB et al (2013) The effect of atomic-scale roughness on the adhesion of nanoscale asperities: a combined simulation and experimental investigation. Tribol Lett 50(1):81–93Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rabinovich YI, Adler JJ, Ata A, Singh RK, Moudgil BM (2000) Adhesion between nanoscale rough surfaces: I. Role of asperity geometry. J Colloid Interface Sci 232(1):10–16Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Na SR, Suk JW, Ruoff RS, Huang R, Liechti KM (2014) Ultra long-range interactions between large area graphene and silicon. ACS Nano 8(11):11234–11242Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gowrishankar S, Mei H, Liechti KM, Huang R (2012) Comparison of direct and iterative methods for determination of silicon/epoxy interface traction-separation relations. Int J Fract 177:109–128Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Stigh U, Andersson T (2000) An experimental method to determine the complete stress-elongation relation for a structural adhesive layer loaded in peel. In: Williams JG, Pavan A (eds) Fracture of polymers, composites and adhesives, vol 27. ESIS publication, pp 297–306Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sorensen BF, Jacobsen TK (2003) Determination of cohesive laws by the J integral approach. Eng Fract Mech 70(14):1841–1858Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Andersson T, Stigh U (2004) The stress–elongation relation for an adhesive layer loaded in peel using equilibrium of energetic forces. Int J Solids Struct 41(2):413–434Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sorensen BF, Kirkegaard P (2006) Determination of mixed mode cohesive laws. Eng Fract Mech 73(17):2642–2661Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhu Y, Liechti KM, Ravi-Chandar K (2009) Direct extraction of rate-dependent traction-separation laws for polyurea/steel interfaces. Int J Solids Struct 46(1):31–51Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wu C, Huang R, Liechti KM (2019) Simultaneous extraction of tensile and shear interactions at interfaces. J Mech Phys Solids 125:225–254Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cox BN, Marshall DB (1991) The determination of crack bridging forces. Int J Fract 49(3):159–176Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Swadener JG, Liechti KM (1998) Asymmetric shielding mechanisms in the mixed-mode fracture of a glass/epoxy interface. J Appl Mech 65(1):25–29Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mohammed I, Liechti KM (2000) Cohesive zone modeling of crack nucleation at bimaterial corners. J Mech Phys Solids 48(4):735–764zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Li S, Thouless MD (2006) Mixed-mode cohesive-zone models for fracture of an adhesively bonded polymer matrix composite. Eng Fract Mech 73:64–78Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mello AV, Liechti KM (2006) The effect of self-assembled monolayers on interfacial fracture. J Appl Mech 73:860–870zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sorensen L, Botsis J, Gmür T, Humbert L (2008) Bridging tractions in mode I delamination: measurements and simulations. Compos Sci Technol 68(12):2350–2358Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gain AL, Carroll J, Paulino GH, Lambros J (2011) A hybrid experimental/numerical technique to extract cohesive fracture properties for mode-I fracture of quasi-brittle materials. Int J Fract 169(2):113–131zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Shen B, Paulino G (2001) Direct extraction of cohesive fracture properties from digital image correlation: a hybrid inverse technique. Exp Mech 51(2):143–163Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Liechti KM, Na SR, Wakamatsu M, Seitz O, Chabal Y (2013) A high vacuum fracture facility for molecular interactions. Exp Mech 53(2):231–241Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sharpe LH (1972) The interphase in adhesion. J Adhes 4(1):51–64Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Winter RM, Houston JE (1998) Nanomechanical properties of the interphase in polymer composites as measured by interfacial force microscopy. In: Mat. Res. Soc. Spring Meeting. San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rakestraw M et al (1995) Time dependent crack growth and loading rate effects on interfacial and cohesive fracture of adhesive joints. J Adhes 55(1–2):123–149Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Swadener JG, Liechti KM, de Lozanne AL (1999) The intrinsic toughness and adhesion mechanism of a glass/epoxy interface. J Mech Phys Solids 47:223–258zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Suk JW, Na SR, Stromberg RJ, Stauffer D, Lee J, Ruoff RS, Liechti KM (2016) Probing the adhesion interactions of graphene on silicon oxide by nanoindentation. Carbon 103:63–72Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kozbial A, Gong X, Liu H, Li L (2015) Understanding the intrinsic water wettability of molybdenum disulfide (MoS2). Langmuir 31(30):8429–8435Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Cao Z, Tao L, Akinwande D, Huang R, Liechti KM (2016) Mixed-mode traction-separation relations between graphene and copper by blister tests. Int J Solids Struct 84:147–159Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Cao Z et al (2015) Mixed-mode interactions between graphene and substrates by blister tests. J Appl Mech 82(8):081008Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Evans AG, Hutchinson JW (1989) Effects of non-planarity on the mixed mode fracture resistance of bimaterial interfaces. Acta Metall 37:909–916Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Jiang T, Huang R, Zhu Y (2014) Interfacial sliding and buckling of monolayer graphene on a stretchable substrate. Adv Funct Mater 24:396–402Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Xia ZC, Hutchinson JW (2000) Crack patterns in thin films. J Mech Phys Solids 48(6):1107–1131zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Goertz MP, Moore NW (2010) Mechanics of soft interfaces studied with displacement-controlled scanning force microscopy. Prog Surf Sci 85(9–12):347–397Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Joyce SA, Houston JE (1991) A new force sensor incorporating force-feedback control for interfacial force microscopy. Rev Sci Instrum 62(3):710–715Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wang M, Liechti KM, Srinivasan V, White JM, Rossky PJ, Stone MT (2006) A hybrid molecular-continuum analysis of IFM experiments of a self-assembled monolayer. J Appl Mech 73:769–777zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Liechti KM, Schnapp ST, Swadener JG (1998) Contact angle and contact mechanics of a glass/epoxy Interface. Int J Fract 86:361Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Grierson DS, Flater EE, Carpick RW (2005) Accounting for the JKR-DMT transition in adhesion and friction measurements with atomic force microscopy. J Adhes Sci Technol 19(3–5):291–311Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Fan X et al (2012) Interaction between graphene and the surface of SiO2. J Phys Condens Matter 24(30):305004Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Gao W, Xiao P, Henkelman G, Liechti KM, Huang R (2014) Interfacial adhesion between graphene and silicon dioxide by density functional theory with van der Waals corrections. J Phys D Appl Phys 47:255301Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Aitken ZH, Huang R (2010) Effects of mismatch strain and substrate surface corrugation on morphology of supported monolayer graphene. J Appl Phys 107:123531Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Gao W, Huang R (2011) Effect of surface roughness on adhesion of graphene membranes. J Phys D Appl Phys 44(45):452001Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Kumar S, Parks D, Kamrin K (2016) Mechanistic origin of the Ultrastrong adhesion between graphene and a-SiO2: beyond van der Waals. ACS Nano 10(7):6552–6562Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Wang P, Gao W, Huang R (2016) Entropic effects of thermal rippling on van der Waals interactions between monolayer graphene and a rigid substrate. J Appl Phys 119(7):074305Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gao W, Liechti KM, Huang R (2015) Wet adhesion of graphene. Extreme Mech Lett 3(0):130–140Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Tsoi S et al (2014) van der Waals screening by single-layer graphene and molybdenum disulfide. ACS Nano 8(12):12410–12417Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for the Mechanics of Solids, Structures and Materials, Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering MechanicsThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations