1: \documentstyle[12pt,cite,epsfig]{article}
2: \textwidth 15 cm
3: \textheight 20 cm
4: \oddsidemargin 38pt
5: \evensidemargin 38pt
6: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
7: \begin{document}
8: \title{$\alpha$-HgS Nanocrystals: Synthesis, Structure and Optical Properties}
9: \author{A. K. Mahapatra\footnote{email :amulya@iopb.res.in}, and A. K. Dash\\
10: Institute of Physics, Sachivalaya Marg,Bhubaneswar,751005,India}
11: \date{}
12: \maketitle
13: \begin{abstract}
14: Well separated Mercury Sulfide (HgS) nanocrystals are
15: synthesized by a wet chemical route. Transmission Electron
16: Microscopy studies show that nanocrystals are nearly spherical in
17: shape with average size of 9nm. Grazing angle X-ray diffraction
18: confirms that HgS nanocrystals are in cinnabar phase. Particle induced
19: X-ray emission and Rutherford back scattering spectrometry analysis
20: reveal HgS nanocrystals are stoichiometric and free from foreign impurities.
21: The optical absorption measurements show two excitonic peaks
22: corresponding to electron-heavy hole and electron-light hole transitions, which
23: are blue shifted by 0.1ev and 0.2 ev respectively from its bulk value, due to
24: quantum size effect. The experimental data obtained by Optical absorption
25: measurement is simulated with a theoretical model considering the particle
26: size distribution as Gaussian.
27: \end{abstract}
28: \noindent{PACS: 61.46.+w, 81.07.Ta, 78.67.Hc }\\
29: \noindent{ Keywords: Nanocrystals, PIXE, RBS, TEM, XRD, Optical absorption}\\
30: \newpage
31: \section*{Introduction}
32:
33: Synthesis of nanocrystals has been of considerable interest for its
34: wide possible application in bio-sensors \cite{alivisatos},
35: catalysis \cite{xu}, light emitting devices \cite{colvin},
36: quantum devices \cite{dabbousi,klein} etc . HgS is also known to be a
37: technologically important material for its pronounced dichorism \cite{zallen},
38: birefringence \cite{bond}, photoelectric \cite{kreingol,roberts} and
39: acousto-optic properties \cite{sapriel}.
40: It is interesting to note that only HgS exists in cinnabar structure
41: ($\alpha$-HgS) at normal condition among all III-V and II-VI
42: compounds \cite{zallen1}. $\alpha$-HgS is a wide band gap
43: semiconductor ($E_g$= 2.0eV). Above $344^0$ C temperature, HgS exhibits a
44: zinc-blende modification($\beta$-HgS) and is a narrow band gap
45: semi-metal ($E_g$= 0.5eV).
46:
47: Very scarce reports are available on nanocrystalline $\alpha$-HgS although
48: considerable work has been carried out for other II-VI group semiconductor nanocrystals.
49: There are few reports available on nanocrystalline $\beta$-HgS and also on complex
50: structures like quantum dot quantum well in which a shell of
51: $\beta$-HgS is embedded in CdS quantum dot \cite{qadri,mews,yeh}. Attempts
52: have been made to synthesize $\alpha$-HgS by Wang et al\cite{wang} using
53: sonochemical method. The nanocrystals synthesized in this route are
54: of irregular shape, aggregated and hava a wide size distribution.
55:
56: The present work reports a cost effective
57: wet chemical route to synthesize $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystals in large scale.
58: The synthesis route is simple as it is a single step process
59: and carried out in room temperature. Use of polymer during synthesis process
60: helps in getting well separated nanocrystals with relatively narrow size distribution.
61: The polymer used here is poly vinyl alcohol (PVA). It is a water soluble, transparent
62: and high viscous polymer.
63:
64: The size, phase, stoichiometry and purity of the $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystals are
65: evaluated by Transmission Electron Microscopy(TEM), Grazing angle X-ray
66: diffraction(GXRD), Rutherford back scattering spectrometry(RBS) and
67: Particle induced X-ray emission spectrometry(PIXE). Optical absorption spectroscopy is
68: used to estimate the band gap as well as the crystallite size distribution.
69:
70: \section*{Experimental}
71:
72: The precursors used for the $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystal synthesis are thiourea,
73: mercury chloride (HgCl$_2$), ammonia and PVA. 0.001 M solution of HgCl$_2$ and
74: thiourea were prepared separately. 4$\%$ aquous solution of PVA is also prepared.
75: 20 ml of PVA solution is added into 20 ml of HgCl$_2$ solution and stirred for ten
76: minute. 20 ml of thiourea solution is added in it in the same stirring condition.
77: Addition of 50 $\mu$l of 3 M ammonia solution turns this transparent solution
78: into a pale yellow colour solution due to formation $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystals.
79: The experiment is done at room temperature (300K).
80:
81: The mechanism of formation of HgS nanocrystals in this
82: chemical route is supposed to undergo the following steps:\\
83: \begin{math}
84: HgCl_2+2NH_4OH \rightarrow [Hg(NH_3)_2]Cl_2+2H_2O \\
85: C(NH_2)_2S+NH_4OH \rightarrow CH_2N_2+H_2O+HS^{-}+ NH_4 ^{+} \\
86: $~$[Hg(NH_3)_2] Cl_2 \rightarrow [Hg(NH_3)_2]^{2+}+2Cl^{-} \\
87: HS^{-}+NH_4OH \rightarrow S^{2^-}+H_2O+{NH_4}^{+} \\
88: 2NH_4^++2Cl^- \rightarrow 2NH_4Cl \\
89: $~$ [Hg(NH_3)_2]^{2^+} + S^{2^-} \rightarrow HgS+2NH_3\uparrow \\
90: \end{math}
91:
92:
93:
94: TEM is performed using JEOL-2010 operated at 200 KeV electron
95: beam energy. For TEM analysis, carbon coated grids are dipped into the
96: colloidal solution and held it aloft to dry in ambient. The GXRD is performed
97: using Philips X'Pert system using cu $k_\alpha$ line as the incident
98: radiation. PIXE and RBS measurements are carried out using the 3MV pelletron
99: accelerator with $H^+$ and $He^{++}$ ion beam of energies 2.5MeV and 3.05MeV
100: respectively. Optical absorption measurements is carried out by using a
101: dual beam Szimadzu UV-3101 PC spectrophotometer with proper baseline
102: correction. For GXRD and Optical absorption measurement colloidal solutions
103: are dried on glass substrate. However, for PIXE and RBS colloidal solutions
104: are dried on silicon substrate instead of glass substrate because elements present
105: in the glass will be reflected in the spectrum and makes the analysis
106: complicated without giving any additional information.
107:
108:
109:
110: \section*{Results and discussions}
111: \subsection*{GXRD and TEM studies}
112: The formation of HgS nanocrystals is confirmed from TEM. The TEM micrograph of a
113: typical HgS nanocrystal sample is shown in the Fig. \ref{tem} and
114: high resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM) micrograph
115: is shown in inset. HRTEM reveals well crystallinity of the nanoparticle.
116: The interplanar distance measured to be 0.335 nm as shown in the figure.
117: This value is same with the interplannar distance between the (101) planes
118: of the $\alpha$-HgS and in good agreement with the value estimated from GXRD
119: and TEM selected area diffraction (SAD) pattern .
120:
121: Optical properties of nanocrystals are sensitive to its shape and size.
122: Hence, synthesis of nanocrystals with uniform shape and size , and most
123: importantly accuracy in its measurement, is essential to derive
124: any meaningful conclusion of its optical properties. It can be noted that the
125: nanocrystals are nearly spherical in shape and well separated, which helps in finding
126: the size and its distribution with a better precision. The
127: size of several nanocrystals ($\approx$700) are recorded. Nanocrystal
128: size histogram along with the fitted Gaussian is shown Fig. \ref{hg} .
129: The particle size distribution is best fitted with a Gaussian of 9.0 nm
130: mean and 2.4nm standard deviation.
131:
132: The average particle size is also calculated by analyzing the (101)
133: peak of GXRD spectra Fig. \ref{xrd}.
134: The crystallite size is calculated from Scherrer equation $\it i. e.$
135: $d$=$\lambda$/$\beta cos(\theta)$. Where $\beta$
136: is the integral breadth of the diffraction peak, $\lambda$ is the
137: wavelength of the incident X-ray and $d$ is the volume weighted
138: average crystallite size. The average crystallite size calculated
139: using above formula is 7.8 nm which is in the error limit of the value
140: obtained from TEM analysis.
141:
142: The interplannar spacing(d) obtained from the GXRD peak
143: are in good agreement corresponding to (101), (110), (104), (201),
144: (006) planes of the standard literature data of $\alpha$-HgS
145: \cite{JCPDS}. The peak at $2\theta=40.4^0$ in the GXRD
146: spectrum is due to PVA\cite{ma}, which plays a major role in avoiding
147: aggregation of nanocrystals. The interpalnar spacing(d) is also calculated
148: from the TEM Selected area diffraction pattern and is in good agreement to
149: (101), (110), (201) planes. The SAD pattern is shown in Fig. \ref{dp}.
150: The continuous ring pattern indicates the polycrystallinity nature of the
151: sample. The formula used to calculate d-value in the SAD pattern is
152: $d_{hkl}$ =$\lambda L$/${R}$. where L is the Camera length,
153: R is the Radius of the Ring and $\lambda$ is the wavelength of the electron
154: beam. Hence it is concluded that nanocrystals are in cinnabar
155: phase ($\alpha$-HgS). $\alpha$-HgS belongs to
156: space group $P{3_1}21({D_3}^4)$ and consists of -S-Hg-S-Hg-S- helical chains,
157: six atoms to a turn. The chains are arranged in close packing, so that space lattice is
158: hexagonal \cite{zallen1}. The lattice parameters in a-axis and c-axis are 4.149
159: $\AA$ and 9.495 $\AA$ respectively. It is reported that some materials show a striking
160: change in lattice parameters in nano phase \cite{yu, lamber}. However no such change in
161: lattice parameter is observed in the case of nanocrystalline $\alpha$-HgS
162: prepared by this chemical route.
163:
164:
165:
166: \subsection*{PIXE and RBS studies}
167: Presence of any impurity in nanocrystals can
168: change its optical properties appreciably. Hence, PIXE and RBS are
169: used to identify the composition, stoichiometry and impurity in the
170: HgS nanocrystals.
171:
172: In the PIXE experiment the multiple target holder is
173: placed in the plane normal to the beam direction. $H^+$ ion beam of
174: energies 2.5MeV is irradiated to the sample. It knocks out electrons from the
175: innermost shells of the atoms and X-rays are emmited with specific energies when
176: outer shell electrons change state to inner shell. Si(Li) detector placed at $90^0$ with
177: respect to the beam direction in order to detect the x-ray emitted by the de-excitation of the atoms in the sample. The beam current is kept in range of 3-5 nA in order to avoid
178: high counting rates at the detector, as it reduces the detection sensitivity due to
179: increase of the background noise. The PIXE spectrum was first calibrated with standard
180: sample and then spectra for $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystals on silicon substrate and a bare
181: silicon is recorded. For comparison purpose the spectra of $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystals on
182: silicon substrate and a bare silicon is shown in Fig. \ref{pixe}. The intensity ratios and
183: energy position of these well resolved peaks are analyzed using GUPIX-2000 software
184: \cite{campbell}. Under simulation it is found that the peaks are coming due to the X-ray
185: emmited from different atomic levels of mercury and Sulfur. Sulfur is a light element.
186: Hence its K X-rays are prominent but mercury being a heavy element,its L X-rays are
187: detected. The peaks are marked as $HgL_\alpha$, $HgL_\beta$,$HgL_\gamma$, and
188: $SK_\alpha$ as shown in the Fig. \ref{pixe}. Absence of any other peak in the spectra suggests
189: that there is no foreign element in the sample even at the ppm level. Here it should be
190: noted that detection of element with atomic number less than 11 is limited due to the
191: use of Si(Li) detector in the experiment. Hence, presence of element having
192: atomic number less than 11 in the sample can not be ruled out.
193:
194: In the RBS experiment the multiple target holder is
195: placed in the plane normal to the beam direction. The $He^{++}$ ion of energy
196: 3.05MeV is irradiated to the sample. Some of these ions backscatter due to ellastic
197: collision with the atomic nuclei of the sample. The energy of these
198: backscattered ions is related to the mass of the target element from which the ion
199: backscatters. For the case of heavy target atoms the back scattered energy is high, for
200: the case of light target atoms the backscattered energy is low. The energy of the
201: backscattered ion is measured by a surface barrier detector, about 20KeV resolution,
202: kept at $150^0$ angle to the incident ion beam. The signals from the detector
203: electronic system are in the form of voltage pulses. The height of the pulses are
204: propertional to the energy of the backscattered ions falling on it. The pulse height
205: analyser stores pulses of a given height in a given voltage bin or channel. The
206: spectrum is first recorded for three known standard samples and then $\alpha$-HgS
207: nanocrystals dried on silicon substrate is used for RBS data collection under the same
208: experimental conditions.
209:
210: The experimental data and the simulated profile (using GISA-3 software) is
211: shown in Fig. \ref{rbs}. The channel numbers are callibrated in terms of the pulse
212: height from the spectrum recorded for three known standard samples. Hence there is a
213: direct relationship between channel number and energy. The prominent peaks in
214: the spectrum are due to backscattering of the $\alpha$-particle from Mercury and
215: Sulfur atom of the HgS nanocrystals. The peaks obtained for Mercury and Sulfur in the
216: spectra have a narrow full width at half maximum suggesting small thickness of the film.The continuous lower energy spectrum is due to the thick silicon substrate. Absence of
217: any other peak in the RBS spectra implies no foreign impurity in the sample.
218: The thickness of the $\alpha$-HgS thinfilm used for simulation is 20 nm. Under
219: simulation, it is found that HgS nanocrystals have stoichiometry.
220:
221: \subsection*{Optical absorption studies}
222: The optical absorption spectrum of a zero
223: dimensional system is expected to have a series of isolated
224: $\delta$-function-like discrete lines.However optical absorption
225: spectrophotometer probes a large number of nanocrystals at a time and the
226: spectrum is the resultant of interaction of all the probed nanocrystals
227: with light. Hence, the degree of size non-uniformity plays an important role in
228: determining the resolvability of the individual peaks corresponding to the
229: allowed energy level transitions and the final line shape of the
230: spectrum. Guided by this, it is decided to simulate the experimental
231: data to find the particle size distribution. the experimental data along with
232: the simulated profile is shown in Fig. \ref{optical}.
233:
234: Following the work of Wu et al \cite{wu} absorption
235: coefficient of a large number of cubical nanocrystals of different size
236: with a Gaussian distribution can be written as
237: $$\alpha=\frac{\beta}{a_o}\sum_{n^2}\frac{g(n^2)}{\xi n^2}e^{-\frac
238: {(\frac{n}{x}-1)^2}{2\xi^2}}$$
239:
240: where two dimensionless parameters,reduced photon energy($x^2$) and
241: relative standard deviation of the nanocrystal size ($\xi^2$) is defined as
242: follows:
243:
244: $$x^2=\frac{\hbar\omega-E_g}{\frac{\pi^2\hbar^2}{2\mu{a_o}^2}}$$ and
245: $$\xi=\frac{D}{a_o}$$
246:
247: Here $E_g$ is the bulk band gap,$\mu$ is the reduced mass of the
248: electron-hole pair, D is the Standard deviation of the Gaussian distribution
249: and $\beta$ is the optical transition dependent constant. Nanocrystals assumed
250: cubical and $a_o$ is the average side length of the nanocrystals. However,
251: $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystals are nearly spherical as observed from TEM measurement. Hence
252: reduced photon energy is modified as
253:
254: $$x^2=\frac{\hbar\omega-E_g}{\frac{2\hbar^2}{\mu{d}^2}}$$ and
255: $$\xi=\frac{D}{d}$$
256:
257:
258: where $d$ is average diameter of the spherical nanocrystals.
259:
260: The energy levels $\it{n}$ are determined by the roots of
261: the spherical Bessel functions $\chi_{ml}$ with $\it{m}$ being the
262: number of the roots and $\it{l}$ being the order of the function. $g(n^2)$
263: is the degeneracy in energy level $\chi_{ml} $ and takes care the intensity
264: contribution due to it.
265:
266: The resolvability of peaks and the final
267: line shape of the absorption spectrum of a quantum dot system is
268: affected due to the contribution from both electron-heavy
269: hole(e-hh) and electron-light hole(e-lh) transitions. The average particle
270: size is 9.0 nm, as obtained from the TEM analysis,and Bulk band gap is
271: 2.0 eV \cite{zallen1}. A survey of literature shows a lack of satisfactory
272: data on the effective mass of the electron and hole of $\alpha$-HgS. Hence the
273: parameters used for simulation are $\mu_{e-hh}$, $\mu_{e-lh}$, relative
274: intensity of contribution due to electron-heavy hole and electron-light
275: hole (I) and D. The experimental data best fits for $\mu_{e-hh}$=0.14$m_0$,
276: $\mu_{e-lh}$=0.07$m_0$, I=1.4 and D=1.7 nm. Hence nanocrystal size estimated
277: to be 9.0nm$\pm$1.7nm. The standard deviation obtained under simulation is
278: nearer but less than the value obtained from the TEM analysis. It should be
279: noted that the number of nanocrystals probed under optical absorption
280: spectroscopy is much larger than the number of nanoparticles analyzed under TEM.
281: The excitonic peak corresponding to electron-heavy hole and electron-light
282: hole transition are blue shifted 0.1ev and 0.2ev respectively from its bulk
283: value due to quantum size effect.
284:
285:
286: \section*{Conclusion}
287: A low cost synthesis process of well separated $\alpha$-HgS
288: nanocrystals using the chemical route is presented. Average size of the
289: nanocrystals are 9.0 nm as determined from the TEM analysis. $\alpha$-HgS
290: Nanocrystals are pure and stoichiometric. The theoretical model fits well to the
291: experimental data of optical absorption spectroscopy and suggests a narrow size
292: distribution of nanocrystals.
293:
294: \section*{Acknowledgment}
295: The help and constant encouragement received from Dr. S. N. Sahu,
296: Dr. R. K. Choudhury and Dr.P. V. Satyam, Institute of Physics, is gratefully
297: acknowledged.
298:
299:
300: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
301: \bibitem{alivisatos}M. Bruchez Jr., M. Moronne,P. Gin, and S. Weiss,
302: A. P. Alivisatos, Science 281, 2013 (1998)
303: \bibitem{xu}Z.Xu, F. S. Xiao, S. K. Purnell, O. Alexeev, S. Kawi, S. E. Deutch,
304: and B. C. Gates, Nature 372,346 (1994)
305: \bibitem{colvin}V.L.Colvin, M. C. Schlamp, and A. P. Alivisatos,
306: Nature 370,354(1994 )
307: \bibitem{dabbousi}B.O.Dabbousi, M. G. Bawendi, O. Onitsuka and M. F. Rubner,
308: Appl. Phys. Lett. 66 , 1316 (1995 )
309: \bibitem{klein}D. L. Klein, R. Roth, A. K. L. Lim, A. P. Alivisatos, and
310: P. L. McEven, Nature 389,699 (1997)
311: \bibitem{zallen}R. Zallan,{\it{II-IV Semiconducting Compounds}},edited by
312: D. G. Thomas (Benjamin,New York,1967),p.877
313: \bibitem{bond}W. L. Bond,G. D. Boyd, and H.L.Carter,J.Appl.Phys. 38,4090(1967)
314: \bibitem{kreingol}F. I. Kreingol'd,Sov.Physics-solid state 4,1904(1963)
315: \bibitem{roberts}G. G. Roberts,E.L.Lind, and E. A. Davis, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 30, 833
316: (1969)
317: \bibitem{sapriel}J. Sapriel, Appl. Phys. Lett. 19,533(1971)
318: \bibitem{zallen1}R.Zallen, G.Lucovsky, W.Taylor, A.Pinczuk, and E. Burstein,
319: Phy. Rev. B 1, 4058 (1970)
320: \bibitem{qadri}S. B. Qadri,M. Kuno,C. R. Feng, and B. B. Rath, Appl. phys. lett., 83, 4011(2003)
321: \bibitem{mews}A.Mews, A. V. Kadavanich, U. Banin, and A. P. Alivisatos, Phys. Rev. B 53, R13242 (1996)
322: \bibitem{yeh}A. T. Yeh, G.Cerullo, U. Banin, A. Mews, A. P. Alivisatos, and C. V. Shank, Phy. Rev. B 59, 4973 (1999)
323: \bibitem{wang}H.Wang, and J.Zhu, Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 11,293 (2004)
324: \bibitem{JCPDS} Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards(JCPDS),File No.
325: 42-1408
326: \bibitem{ma}X. D. Ma, X. F. Qian, J. Yin, and Z. K. Zhu, J.Mater. Chem. 12,663
327: (2002)
328: \bibitem{yu}X.F.Yu, X.Liu, K.Zhang, and Z.Q.Hu,J.Phys.:Condens. Matter 11,937
329: (1999)
330: \bibitem{lamber}R.Lamber,S.Wetien, and N.I.Jaeger,Phys. Rev. B 51,10968 (1995)
331: \bibitem{campbell}J.L. Campbell, T.L. Hopman, J.A.Maxwell, Z. Nezedely, Nucl. Instr.
332: and Meth. B 170 (2000) 193
333: \bibitem{wu}W.Y.Wu,J.N.Schulman,T.Y.Hsu,U.Efron,Appl. Phys. Lett.51,710(1987)
334: \end{thebibliography}
335: \newpage
336: \begin{figure}
337: \begin{center}
338: \hspace*{-2cm}
339: \epsfxsize=13true cm{\epsfbox{tem.eps}}
340: \caption{TEM micro-graph of the Nanocrystals and HRTEM image is
341: shown in the inset.}
342: \label{tem}
343: \end{center}
344: \end{figure}
345:
346: \newpage
347: \begin{figure}
348: \begin{center}
349: \hspace*{-4cm}
350: {\epsfbox{histogram.eps}}
351: \caption{Nanocrystal size histogram}
352: \label{hg}
353: \end{center}
354: \end{figure}
355:
356: \newpage
357: \begin{figure}
358: \begin{center}
359: \hspace*{-2cm}
360: \epsfysize=15true cm \epsfxsize=18true cm{\epsfbox{xrd.eps}}
361: \caption{GXRD spectrum of $\alpha$-HgS Nanocrystals.}
362: \label{xrd}
363: \end{center}
364: \end{figure}
365:
366: \newpage
367: \begin{figure}
368: \begin{center}
369: \hspace*{-4cm}
370: \epsfxsize=15true cm{\epsfbox{dp.eps}}
371: \caption{Selected area diffraction pattern of $\alpha$-HgS Nanocrystals.}
372: \label{dp}
373: \end{center}
374: \end{figure}
375:
376:
377: \newpage
378: \begin{figure}
379: \begin{center}
380: \hspace*{-3cm}
381: \epsfxsize=18true cm{\epsfbox{pixe.eps}}
382: \caption{PIXE spectra of (a) the HgS nanocrystals on Silicon
383: substrate and (b) the Silicon substrate only.}
384: \label{pixe}
385: \end{center}
386: \end{figure}
387:
388: \newpage
389: \begin{figure}
390: \begin{center}
391: \hspace*{-4cm}
392: \epsfxsize=15true cm{\epsfbox{rbs.eps}}
393: \caption{RBS spectrum of the HgS nanocrystals on silicon substrate.The solid
394: line is the theoretical fit to the experimental data.}
395: \label{rbs}
396: \end{center}
397: \end{figure}
398:
399: \newpage
400: \begin{figure}
401: \begin{center}
402: \hspace*{-3cm}
403: \epsfxsize=15true cm{\epsfbox{optical.eps}}
404: \caption{Optical absorption spectra of $\alpha$-HgS nanocrystals.Two lower
405: curves are contribution due to electron-heavy hole transition and
406: electron-Light hole transition.}
407: \label{optical}
408: \end{center}
409: \end{figure}
410: \newpage
411:
412: \end{document}
413:
414:
415:
416: