4.3 Article

Epitaxial TiO2/SnO2 core-shell heterostructure by atomic layer deposition

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY
卷 22, 期 21, 页码 10665-10671

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c2jm30690e

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [11002124, 11090333]
  2. Science Foundation of Chinese University [2011QNA4038]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Taking TiO2/SnO2 core-shell nanowires (NWs) as a model system, we systematically investigate the structure and the morphological evolution of this heterostructure synthesized by atomic layer deposition/epitaxy (ALD/ALE). All characterizations, by X-ray diffraction, high-resolution transmission electron microscopy, selected area electron diffraction and Raman spectra, reveal that single crystalline rutile TiO2 shells can be epitaxially grown on SnO2 NWs with an atomically sharp interface at low temperature (250 degrees C). The growth behavior of the TiO2 shells highly depends on the surface orientations and the geometrical shape of the core SnO2 NW cross-section. Atomically smooth surfaces are found for growth on the {110} surface. Rough surfaces develop on {100} surfaces due to (100) - (1 x 3) reconstruction, by introducing steps in the [010] direction as a continuation of {110} facets. Lattice mismatch induces superlattice structures in the TiO2 shell and misfit dislocations along the interface. Conformal epitaxial growth has been observed for SnO2 NW cores with an octagonal cross-section ({100} and {110} surfaces). However, for a rectangular core ({10 $$(1) over bar} and {010} surfaces), the shell also derives an octagonal shape from the epitaxial growth, which was explained by a proposed model based on ALD kinetics. The surface steps and defects induced by the lattice mismatch likely lead to improved photoluminescence (PL) performance for the yellow emission. Compared to the pure SnO2 NWs, the PL spectrum of the core-shell nanostructures exhibits a stronger emission peak, which suggests potential applications in optoelectronics.

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

4.3
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