4.6 Article

The role of H2O and O2 molecules and phosphorus vacancies in the structure instability of phosphorene

期刊

2D MATERIALS
卷 4, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/2053-1583/4/1/015010

关键词

phosphorene; vacancy; water and oxygen; oxidation

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Singapore (Academic Research Fund TIER) [1-RG128/14]
  2. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore
  3. Science and Engineering Research Council [152-70-00017]
  4. Russian Science Foundation [14-13-00982]
  5. Russian Science Foundation [17-13-00090, 14-13-00982] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The poor structural stability of phosphorene in air was commonly ascribed to humidity and oxygen molecules. Recent exfoliation of phosphorene in deoxygenated water promotes the need to re-examine the role of H2O and O-2 molecules. Considering the presence of high population of vacancies in phosphorene, we investigate the interaction of H2O and O-2 molecules with vacancy-contained phosphorene using first-principles calculations. In contrast to the common notion that physisorbed molecules tend to have a stronger adsorption at vacancy sites, we show that H2O has nearly the same adsorption energy at the vacancy site as that at the perfect one. Charge transfer analysis shows that O-2 is a strong electron scavenger, which transfers the lone-pair electrons of the phosphorus atoms to the 2 pi* antibonding orbital of O-2. As a result, the barrier for the O-O bond splitting to form O-P bonds is reduced from 0.81 eV at the perfect site to 0.59 eV at the defect site, leading to an about 5000 faster oxidizing rate at the defect site than at the perfect site at room temperature. Hence, our work reveals that the vacancy in phosphorene shows a stronger oxygen affinity than the perfect phosphorene lattice site. Structural degradation of phosphorene due to oxidization may occur rapidly at edges and grain boundaries where vacancies tend to agglomerate.

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