184
Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 76, No. 2, 10 January 2000
Puretzky et al.
dominates any laser-induced luminescence. As in Fig. 4͑a͒,
the d3⌸g→a3⌸u Swan system of C2 and the A1⌸u
→X1⌺g band C3 are prominent at these times. Later when
the plasma expands, cools, and recombines, the 308-nm-
XeCl laser can induce emission by pumping transitions from
the ground states: of C3 ͑via A1⌸u X1⌺g͒; of atomic Co
͑via a4FJ y4G0J͒; and of atomic Ni ͑via a3D1 y3D02͒.
In addition, blackbody radiation can be induced from
carbon clusters,17 nanoparticles,18 and nanotubes. The inten-
sity of this blackbody emission, I, is defined by IϭAr3(T0
ϩ⌬T)5 where T0 is the initial temperature of the cluster, ⌬T
is the temperature increase due to laser-heating, A is a con-
stant, and r is the cluster radius. This radiation becomes ob-
servable coincident with the disappearance of the C2 and C3
bands in both the plasma emission and the laser-induced
spectra for ⌬tϾ200 s at 1000 °C ͑and ⌬tϾ100 s at room
temperature͒. We conclude that nearly all of the carbon in
the plume has converted into clusters or larger aggregates by
these times.
However, the Co in the plume remains in atomic form
until much later. As shown in Figs. 3͑c͒ and 4͑c͒, the
ground-state Co population peaks at ⌬tϭ0.8 ms and drops
by an order of magnitude by ⌬tϭ2 ms, permitting estimates
of the Co clustering time of ϳ2 ms at 1000 °C ͑ϳ1 ms at
room temperature͒. Blackbody radiation remains the only
feature of the spectra taken at all later times ͓Fig. 4͑d͔͒.
Further evidence of the sequential condensation of car-
bon and cobalt into clusters is the relatively uniform spatial
distribution of atomic Co in the plume for ⌬tϽ2 ms com-
pared to the vorticity of the clustered carbon material ͓com-
pare Figs. 3͑a͒ and 3͑b͔͒. We believe that the higher diffu-
sivity of the atomic Co effectively competes with the
hydrodynamic trapping during this time. Only the leading
edge of the atomic-Co plume overlaps the carbon-cluster
vortex ring during the condensation of the Co atoms. The
NixCoy alloy particles indicate similar condensation times
for Ni and Co. It is quite possible that the carbon clusters
serve as condensation centers for metal cluster growth.
Both imaging and spectroscopy indicate that within the
first few milliseconds after laser ablation, atoms and mol-
ecules of both carbon and metal catalyst disappear due to
condensation into nanoparticles. Unless SWNTs grow very
rapidly from atoms and molecules within these first few mil-
liseconds, the majority of growth appears to occur from a
feedstock of mixed nanoparticles over seconds of annealing
time.
average growth rate of 0.2 m/s at 1000 °C. The relative
yield of the carbon particles is much larger than the yield of
the carbon nanotubes which clearly shows that the time spent
by the plume in the hot zone ͑ϳ0.5 s͒ was not sufficient to
convert all of the carbon material into nanotubes.
In summary, these results confirm the conclusions of the
time-resolved imaging and spectroscopy measurements
͑along with ex situ TEM, EELS, and FESEM͒. Although
SWNT may initiate growth during the first few milliseconds
after laser ablation, the majority of growth occurs inside the
oven from a mixture of gas-suspended carbon and metal-
catalyst nanoparticles which are hydrodynamically trapped
in a vortex ring within a ϳ1 cm3 volume for several seconds.
The spectroscopy at early times after laser ablation indicates
that the plume initially consists of atomic and molecular spe-
cies, with no evidence of hot molten particulates which were
recently suggested as the primary ejecta.19 Condensation of
carbon occurs within 0.2 ms after ablation, while atomic Co
condenses much later ͑between 1.5 and 2 ms͒. Through these
images of the growth process, we conclude that long ͑ϳ10
m͒ SWNT can form from the small amount of material
vaporized in a single-laser shot, a remarkable feat of self-
assembly.
The authors gratefully acknowledge research assistance
by M. L. Simpson, M. Guillorn, and helpful conversations
with D. J. Rader. This work was sponsored by the Division
of Material Science, U.S. Department of Energy under Con-
tract No. DE-AC05-96-R22464 with Lockheed Martin En-
ergy Research Corp.
1 B. Yakobson and R. E. Smalley, Am. Sci. 85, 324 ͑1997͒.
2 T. Guo, P. Nikolaev, A. Thess, D. T. Colbert, and R. E. Smalley, Chem.
Phys. Lett. 236, 419 ͑1995͒.
3 T. S. Iijima and T. Ichihashi, Nature ͑London͒ 363, 603 ͑1993͒.
4 C. Journet, W. K. Maser, P. Bernier, A. Loiseau, M. Lamy de la Chapelle,
S. Lefrant, P. Deniard, R. Lee, and J. E. Fisher, Nature ͑London͒ 388, 756
͑1997͒.
5 H. M. Cheng, F. Li, G. Su, H. Y. Pan, L. L. He, X. Sun, and M. S.
Dresselhaus, Appl. Phys. Lett. 72, 3282 ͑1998͒.
6 B. C. Satiskumar, A. Govindaraj, R. Sen, and C. N. R. Rao, Chem. Phys.
Lett. 293, 47 ͑1998͒.
7 M. Yudasaka, T. Ichihashi, T. Komatsu, and S. Iijima, Chem. Phys. Lett.
299, 91 ͑1999͒.
8 S. Arepalli and C. D. Scott, Chem. Phys. Lett. 302, 139 ͑1999͒.
9 F. Kokai, K. Takahashi, M. Yudasaka, R. Yamada, T. Ichihashi, and S.
Iijima, J. Phys. Chem. B103, 4346 ͑1999͒.
10 D. B. Geohegan, A. A. Puretzky, G. Duscher, and S. J. Pennycook, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 72, 2987 ͑1998͒.
11 D. B. Geohagan, A. A. Puretzky, G. Duscher, and S. J. Pennycook, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 73, 438 ͑1998͒.
In order to check this conclusion and estimate the
SWNT growth rate, the target was positioned at several dis-
tances from the front furnace edge to adjust the time spent
within the hot zone before exiting the furnace in the up-
stream direction. LIL-ICCD imaging recorded the plume dy-
namics from ablation to deposition and the collected deposits
were examined by TEM.
Figure 2͑b͒ shows a TEM image of a deposit collected
for a target position of dϭ12.5 cm ͑see Fig. 1͒, where
LIL-ICCD imaging measured a time of 0.5–0.7 s spent by
the plume inside the furnace. The collected material consists
of aggregated carbon and metal-catalyst nanoparticles, and
thin SWNT bundles of only ϳ100 nm length, yielding an
12 D. B. Geohegan, A. A. Puretzky, and D. J. Rader, Appl. Phys. Lett. 74,
3788 ͑1999͒.
13 D. B. Geohegan, A. A. Puretzky, R. L. Hettich, X.-Y. Zheng, R. E. Hau-
fler, and R. N. Compton, Trans. Mater. Res. Soc. Jpn. 17, 349 ͑1994͒.
14 Images also available online at www.ornl.gov/ϳodg.
15 A. V. Bulgakov and N. M. Bulgakova, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 31, 693
͑1998͒.
16 F. Garrelie, C. Champeaux, and A. Catherinot, Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci.
Process. 69, 45 ͑1999͒.
17 D. B. Geohegan and A. A. Puretzky, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 397, 55
͑1996͒.
18 E. A. Rohlfing, J. Chem. Phys. 89, 6103 ͑1988͒.
19 M. Yudasaka, R. Yamada, N. Sensui, T. Wilkins, T. Ichihashi, and S.
Iijima, J. Phys. Chem. B 103, 6224 ͑1999͒.
132.174.255.116 On: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 10:59:01