Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:55:55.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kinetics of Linear Defect Formation in Gallia-Doped Rutile.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Nathan Empie  and
Doreen Edwards
Nathan Empie
Affiliation:
Alfred University School of EngineeringNew York State College of Ceramics Alfred, NY, 14802
Doreen Edwards
Affiliation:
Alfred University School of EngineeringNew York State College of Ceramics Alfred, NY, 14802
Get access

Abstract

The diffusion of Ga2O3 into the surface of single crystal[001] rutile leads to the insertion of β-gallia subunits along {210} planes of the parent rutile structure. These linear defects introduce hexagonally shaped tunnels, approximately 2.5 å in diameter, normal to the]001] surface. Because these tunnels may serve as highly reactive sites for the attachment of macromolecules, we are exploring the application of these linear defects for creating nanostructures. The current work investigates the kinetics of defect formation and the factors that affect defect periodicity and orientation. Gallium oxide was applied to the surfaces of [001]-oriented TiO2 single-crystal substrates via a sol-gel spin-coating process using a gallium-containing precursor. Thermal treatments were systematically varied to obtain different defect surface structures. Defect orientation and the surface concentration of rows of defects were characterized via tapping mode atomic force microscopy.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 849: Symposium KK – Kinetics-Driven Nanopatterning on Surfaces , 2004 , KK3.12
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Kamiya, S. and Tilley, R.J.D., J. Solid State Chem., 22 205–16 (1977).Google Scholar
2. Bursill, L.A. and Stone, G.G., J. Solid State Chem., 38 [2] 149–57 (1981).Google Scholar
3. Kahn, A., Agafonov, V., Michel, D., and Perez Y Jorba, M., J. Solid State Chem., 65 377–82 (1986).Google Scholar
4. Lloyd, D.J., Grey, I.E., and Bursill, L.A., Acta Cryst., B32 1756–61 (1976).Google Scholar
5. Bursill, L.A., Acta Cyst., A 35 449–58 (1979).Google Scholar
6. Stone, G.G. and Bursill, L.A., Philos. Mag., 35 1397–412 (1977).Google Scholar
7. Gibb, R.M. and Anderson, J.S., J. Solid State Chem., 5 212–25 (1972).Google Scholar
8. Edwards, D.D., Mason, T.O., Sinkler, W., M. L. D., , Poeppelmeier, K.R., Hu, Z., and Jorgensen, J.D., J. Solid State Chem., 150 [2] 294–304 (2000).Google Scholar
9. Hansma, H.G. and Lane, D.E., Biophysical Journal, 70 [4] 1933–9 (1996).Google Scholar
10. Eichhorn, G.L. and Shin, Y.A., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 90 [26] 7323–8 (1968).Google Scholar
11. Pastre, D., Pietrement, O., Fusil, S., Landousy, F., Jeusset, J., David, M., Hamon, L., Cam, E., and Zozime, A., Biophysical Journal, 85 [4] 2507–18 (2003).Google Scholar
12. Li, Y., Trinchi, A., Wlodarski, W., Galatsis, K., and Kalantar-zadeh, K., Sensors and Actuators, B 93 431–4 (2003).Google Scholar
13. Iguchi, E. and Tilley, R.J.D., J. Crys. Growth, 58 601–10 (1982).Google Scholar