This paper details the fabrication process of a gate-tunable graphene device, decorated with Coulomb impurities for scanning tunneling microscopy studies. Mapping the spatially dependent electronic structure of graphene in the presence of charged impurities unveils the unique behavior of its relativistic charge carriers in response to a local Coulomb potential.
Owing to its relativistic low-energy charge carriers, the interaction between graphene and various impurities leads to a wealth of new physics and degrees of freedom to control electronic devices. In particular, the behavior of graphene’s charge carriers in response to potentials from charged Coulomb impurities is predicted to differ significantly from that of most materials. Scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) and scanning tunneling spectroscopy (STS) can provide detailed information on both the spatial and energy dependence of graphene's electronic structure in the presence of a charged impurity. The design of a hybrid impurity-graphene device, fabricated using controlled deposition of impurities onto a back-gated graphene surface, has enabled several novel methods for controllably tuning graphene’s electronic properties.1-8 Electrostatic gating enables control of the charge carrier density in graphene and the ability to reversibly tune the charge2 and/or molecular5 states of an impurity. This paper outlines the process of fabricating a gate-tunable graphene device decorated with individual Coulomb impurities for combined STM/STS studies.2-5 These studies provide valuable insights into the underlying physics, as well as signposts for designing hybrid graphene devices.
Graphene is a two-dimensional material with a unique linear band structure, which gives rise to its exceptional electrical, optical, and mechanical properties.1,9-16 Its low-energy charge carriers are described as relativistic, massless Dirac fermions15, whose behavior differs significantly from that of non-relativistic charge carriers in traditional systems.15-18 Controlled deposition of a variety of impurities onto graphene provides a simple yet versatile platform for experimental studies of the response of these relativistic charge carriers to a range of perturbations. Investigations of such systems reveal that graphene impurities can shift the chemical potential6,7, alter the effective dielectric constant8, and potentially lead to electronically mediated superconductivity9. Many of these studies6-8 employ electrostatic gating as a means to tuning the properties of the hybrid impurity-graphene device. Electrostatic gating can shift the electronic structure of a material with respect to its Fermi level without hysteresis.2-5 Moreover, by tuning the charge2 or molecular5 states of such impurities, electrostatic gating can reversibly modify the properties of a hybrid impurity-graphene device.
Back-gating a graphene device provides an ideal system for investigation by scanning tunneling microscopy (STM). A scanning tunneling microscope consists of a sharp metal tip held a few angstroms away from a conductive surface. By applying a bias between the tip and the surface, electrons tunnel between the two. In the most common mode, constant current mode, one can map the topography of the sample surface by raster-scanning the tip back and forth. Additionally, the local electronic structure of the sample can be studied by examining a differential conductance dI/dV spectrum, which is proportional to local density of states (LDOS). This measurement is often termed scanning tunneling spectroscopy (STS). By separately controlling the bias and back-gate voltages, the response of graphene to impurities can be studied by analyzing the behavior of these dI/dV spectra.2-5
In this report, the fabrication of a back-gated graphene device decorated with Coulomb impurities (e.g., charged Ca atoms) is outlined. The device consists of elements in the following order (from top to bottom): calcium adatoms and clusters, graphene, hexagonal boron nitride (h-BN), silicon dioxide (SiO2), and bulk silicon (Figure 1). h-BN is an insulating thin film, which provides an atomically flat and electrically homogeneous substrate for the graphene.19-21 h-BN and SiO2 act as dielectrics, and bulk Si serves as the back-gate.
To fabricate the device, graphene is first grown on an electrochemically polished Cu foil22,23, which acts as a clean catalytic surface for the chemical vapor deposition (CVD)22-25 of graphene. In a CVD growth, methane (CH4) and hydrogen (H2) precursor gases undergo pyrolysis to form domains of graphene crystals on the Cu foil. These domains grow and eventually merge together, forming a polycrystalline graphene sheet.25 The resulting graphene is transferred onto the target substrate, an h-BN/SiO2 chip (prepared by mechanical exfoliation19-21 of h-BN onto an SiO2/Si(100) chip), via poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) transfer.26-28 In the PMMA transfer, the graphene on Cu is first spin-coated with a layer of PMMA. The PMMA/graphene/Cu sample then floats on an etchant solution (e.g., FeCl3 (aq)28), which etches away the Cu. The unreacted PMMA/graphene sample is fished with an h-BN/SiO2 chip and subsequently cleaned in an organic solvent (e.g., CH2Cl2) and Ar/H2 environment29,30 to remove the PMMA layer. The resulting graphene/h-BN/SiO2/Si sample is then wire-bonded to electrical contacts on an ultra-high-vacuum (UHV) sample plate and annealed in an UHV chamber. Finally, the graphene device is deposited in situ with Coulomb impurities (e.g., charged Ca atoms) and studied by STM.2-5
1. Electrochemical Polishing of a Cu Foil22,23
Note: Electrochemical polishing exposes bare Cu surface for graphene growth by removing the protective surface coating and controls the growth seed density.
2. Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) of Graphene on a Cu Foil22-25
3. Mechanical Exfoliation19-21 of h-BN onto a SiO2 Chip
4. Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA)26-28 Transfer of Graphene onto h-BN/SiO2
5. Ar/H2 Annealing29,30
6. Assembling a Gate-tunable Graphene Device for STM Measurement2-5
7. STM Tip Calibration on Au(111) Surface31
8. Scanning Graphene
9. Depositing Coulomb Impurities on a Graphene Surface2-4
Figure 1 illustrates a schematic of a back-gated graphene device. Wire-bonding Au/Ti contact to an UHV sample plate grounds graphene electrically, while wire-bonding Si bulk to an electrode that connects to an external circuit back-gates the device. By back-gating a device, a charge state of a Coulomb impurity at a given sample bias (which is controlled by the STM tip) can be tuned to a different charge state.2-4
Figure 2 outlines the steps for fabricating a gate-tunable graphene device. A Cu foil is first electrochemically polished to remove its protective surface coating and modify its growth seed density.23,24 After electrochemical polishing, the Cu foil should appear shinier under the naked eye than before as its surface should have become smoother. The electrochemically polished Cu foil then acts as a catalytic substrate for CVD growth of graphene. Graphene is then transferred onto an h-BN/SiO2 substrate via PMMA transfer. The resulting sample is cleaned in an Ar/H2 atmosphere and characterized (Figure 3). Subsequently, it is assembled into a back-gated device.
Before the sample is assembled into a back-gated device, the graphene surface is characterized by an optical microscope (Figure 3A), Raman spectroscopy (Figure 3B), and AFM (Figure 3C). With an optical microscope image, it is easy to examine the cleanliness, continuity, and the number of graphene layers throughout the entire sample. With a Raman spectrum, the number of graphene layers and defect level can be evaluated by examining the IG:I2D peak intensity ratio and D peak intensity, respectively.32 With an AFM image, various features — cleanliness, uniformity, surface roughness, etc. — of the sample can be reliably evaluated at a small length scale (<500 nm). A good sample should appear clean, continuous, uniform, and monolayered under both optical microscope and AFM images. Moreover, a good sample should exhibit a minimal D peak intensity (a sign of minimal defect) and less than 1:2 ratio of IG:I2D peak intensity ratio (a sign of monolayer) under Raman spectroscopy.32
Before the device can be characterized under a STM, a STM tip must be calibrated on an Au(111) surface to decouple the STM tip states from the sample’s surface states as much as possible. Without the tip calibration, the differential conductance dI/dV spectrum will appear convoluted due to a strong coupling between the tip states and the sample’s surface states: in other words, STM data taken from an uncalibrated tip may not represent the real property of the sample. To calibrate the tip, the STM tip is repetitively pulsed/poked into an Au(111) surface until a high resolution image of herringbone reconstruction (Figure 4A) can be obtained and a dI/dV spectrum appears comparable to the standard Au(111) dI/dV spectrum (Figure 4B). The dI/dV spectrum should exhibit a sharp step at Vsample≈ -0.5 V, which represents the onset of the Au(111) surface state. Moreover, the dI/dV spectrum should exhibit no anomalous peaks and dips, which may appear as artifacts when performing dI/dV measurements on graphene.
After the tip calibration, the sample surface is examined with STM. Figure 5A shows a Moiré pattern for graphene/h-BN, which arises from a mismatch in the lattice constants of graphene and h-BN. The wavelength of a Moiré pattern depends on the angle of rotation between the graphene and underlying h-BN lattices: smaller the twist angle, greater the wavelength. Appearance of Moiré pattern confirms the presence of clean graphene on an h-BN substrate. Once the sample surface is examined, Ca ions are deposited onto graphene, whose topography is shown in Figure 5B. A Moiré pattern appears in the background of the image. Once charged Ca atoms are successfully deposited, STM tip can construct artificial nuclei consisting of multiple charged Ca dimers by pushing each dimer into small clusters. STM study results for charged Co and Ca adatoms are shown in Ref. 2 & 3 and Ref. 4, respectively.
Figure 1. Schematic of a gate-tunable graphene device. Graphene is grounded to the sample plate while Si layer connects to a gate electrode through wire-bonding.2-5 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2. Process schematics of gate-tunable graphene device fabrication. The steps of fabricating a gate-tunable graphene device include: 1) CVD graphene growth on an electrochemically polished Cu foil, 2) – 5) PMMA transfer of graphene onto a h-BN/SiO2 chip, 6) Ar/H2 annealing, 7) evaporation of Au/Ti contact, 8) mounting onto an UHV sample plate, and 9) wire-bonding. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3. Pre-STM characterization of a graphene/h-BN/SiO2 heterostructure. (A) Optical microscope image of graphene/h-BN/SiO2 heterostructure. (B) Raman spectrum of graphene/SiO2 region. Raman spectrum of graphene is characterized by D (~1,350 cm-1), G (~1,580 cm-1), and 2D (~2,690 cm-1) peaks.32 (C) Atomic force microscope (AFM) image of graphene/h-BN/SiO2 region. This image is a height map taken with tapping mode AFM. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4. STM characterization of Au(111) surface for STM tip calibration.31 (A) Topography of Au(111) surface. (B) Standard dI/dV spectrum of Au(111) surface. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 5. STM Topography of Coulomb impurities on graphene. (A) Moiré pattern for graphene/h-BN.20,21 (B) Ca adatoms on graphene.4 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
For STM characterization, critical goals of the graphene device fabrication include: 1) growing monolayer graphene with a minimal number of defects, 2) obtaining a large, clean, uniform, and continuous graphene surface, 3) assembling a graphene device with high resistance between the graphene and the gate (i.e., no “gate leakage”), and 4) depositing individual Coulomb impurities.
The first goal is governed by the CVD process, during which graphene grows on a Cu foil. Although there are multiple substrate candidates (e.g., Ni, Ru, Ir, Pt, Co, Pd, etc.), Cu is well known to produce monolayer graphene most selectively due to its extremely low carbon solubility.25 Nevertheless, selectively growing monolayer graphene can still be difficult and inconsistent due to a wide range of factors.22-25 Although electrochemical polishing certainly provides a better substrate condition for graphene growth, our AFM characterizations have shown that the Cu surface remains non-uniform and rough on the microscopic level. Moreover, the level of contamination from chemical residue may vary from foil to foil. Annealing parameters are essential for consistently providing a clean and uniform Cu surface during growth. Annealing the Cu at a high temperature (1,050 °C) near its melting point (1,085 °C) with a high flow of hydrogen (~200 sccm) seems to provide a consistently clean and uniform Cu surface with large Cu domains.22 The growth temperature, pressure regime, and CH4:H2 flow rate ratio can then be systematically optimized until monolayer graphene with a minimal number of defects is obtained.
The second goal — obtaining a large, clean, uniform, and continuous graphene surface — is governed by the PMMA transfer and Ar/H2 annealing. Although there are a number of different graphene transfer methods (e.g., dry PMMA/PDMS transfer27, wet PDMS transfer24, etc.), PMMA transfer with FeCl3 (aq) etchant solution28 has consistently yielded the most continuous/uniform graphene surfaces. However, this method leaves a high density of chemical residue on the graphene surface. To resolve this issue, the spin-coating rate and time were first optimized to make the PMMA layer as uniform as possible. Additionally, multiple cleaning steps with ultra-pure water baths were introduced to remove chemical residue from the graphene’s back surface before fishing it out with an h-BN/SiO2 chip. From these efforts, relatively clean samples, as seen by an optical microscope, have been transferred consistently. No variation in the PMMA transfer method, however, can completely clean up the graphene surface as it always leaves a thin layer of PMMA. To obtain an atomically clean surface (STM studies require clean regions >100 nm2), a series of annealing procedures must be performed. Ar/H2 annealing can effectively remove a majority of the PMMA layer. After Ar/H2 annealing,29 the graphene surface appears to be clean under inspection by ambient AFM (Figure 3). Yet, a thin PMMA layer undetectable by ambient AFM still covers the graphene surface, which requires further in situ UHV annealing to remove. It is important to keep in mind that post-transfer annealing can only clean a relatively residue-free surface only; a sample’s ultimate cleanliness depends mainly on the transfer.
The third goal — assembling a graphene device without any gate leakage — is governed by post-Ar/H2 annealing steps. When mounting the device on a sample plate, it is critical to electrically disconnect the device from the rest of the sample plate with sapphire flakes; the only electrical contact between the sample plate and the device should be the wire-bonds. Wire-bonding introduces the risk of breaking the device if excessive power is supplied as any form of fracture in the SiO2 layer (regardless of how small) may lead to gate leakage. Wire-bonding parameters must thus be optimized ahead of time. Because gate leakage may occur not only in the device but also throughout the STM chamber, a large amount of time and resources may be wasted to identify and fix the leakage source. It is important to minimize the risk of gate leakage while assembling a graphene device.
The fourth goal — depositing individual Coulomb impurities — is governed by the calibration steps prior to the deposition. It is imperative to optimize the deposition parameters in the UHV test chamber (and additionally on the Cu(100) surface in situ) for a controlled deposition. Purity of the deposition needs to be carefully evaluated with an RGA because random impurities will not only skew the deposition rate measured by QCM but also result in unwanted doping. If the device were irreversibly doped by an unknown impurity, the graphene’s response to Coulomb impurities might be undesirably altered.
In addition to these challenges, an STM study may be limited in several ways. In a differential conductance measurement, it is impossible to completely decouple the tip electronic states from the sample states. Even with a well-calibrated tip, it may be challenging to determine the origin of a spectroscopic feature. Moreover, information gained from measurements carried out in UHV (10-10 Torr) and a T = 4 K may not be relevant to devices operated in less ideal conditions.
That being said, STM has many advantages over other techniques. It has not only a high energy resolution (few meV) but also a high spatial resolution (~10 pm). For comparison, ARPES has a relatively lower spatial resolution (sub-micron), but a comparable energy resolution (few meV). STM can also be used to manipulate the position of individual atoms on a device to create novel charge configurations. For example, Yang et al. created artificial nuclei of charged Ca dimers on a back-gated graphene device with an STM tip and characterized an atomic collapse state on the graphene surface.4 With these advantages in mind, STM is one of the most powerful and reliable techniques for characterizing the spatially dependent response of graphene to various perturbations in a well-controlled environment.
STM studies of gate-tunable graphene devices deposited with Coulomb impurities are valuable not only for testing fundamental theories but also for understanding hybrid graphene device applications. They can experimentally verify fundamental predictions about the behavior of massless Dirac fermions in novel systems, which exhibit significantly different behavior compared to charge carriers in conventional systems.15-18 Furthermore, such studies can reveal some of graphene’s most unexpected characteristics4, which leads to a deeper understanding of charge carriers in relativistic regimes. New insight into the physical laws that govern graphene systems will be highly beneficial for precision tuning of the properties of hybrid graphene devices.2-5
The authors have nothing to disclose.
Our research was supported by the Director, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences of the U.S. Department of Energy sp2 Program under contract no. DE-AC02-05CH11231 (STM instrumentation development and device integration); the Office of Naval Research (device characterization), and NSF award no. CMMI-1235361 (dI/dV imaging). STM data were analyzed and rendered using WSxM software.33 D. W. and A.J.B. were supported by the Department of Defense (DoD) through the National Defense Science & Engineering Graduate Fellowship (NDSEG) Program, 32 CFR 168a.
Cu foil | Alfa Aesar | CAS # 7440-50-8 | 99.8% Cu |
Lot # F22X029 | |||
Stock # 13382 | |||
Scotch Magic Tape | Scotch® | N/A | for exfoliation of hBN |
PMMA | Micro Chem | M23004 0500L 1GL | A4 |
FeCl3 resistant spoon | Bel-Art ScienceWare | 367300015 | PTFE coated double ended |
chemical spoon, 15 cm length | |||
FeCl3 (aq) | Ricca Chemical | 3127-16 | 40% w/v |
SiO2/Si(100) Chip | NOVA Electric Materials | HS39626-OX | n/a |
h-BN | K. Watanabe and | Contact the group | hexagonal Japanese BN (JBN) |
T. Taniguchi Group | |||
Au(111) | Agilent Technologies | N9805B-FG | Au(111) epitaxially grown on mica |
Sapphire | Precision Ferrites & Ceramic, Inc. | Contact vendor | P/N Sapphire Chips |
0.22 X 0.125 X 0.015" | |||
Ca source | Trace Sciences International Corp. | AS-3-Ca-5-S | n/a |
Cu(100) | Princeton Scientific | Contact vendor | Cu(100) single crystal |
Methane | Praxair, Inc. | ME 5.0RS-K | Graphene growth precursor gas |
Hydrogen | Praxair, Inc. | HY 6.0RS-K | Graphene growth precursor gas |