Patent
US 10,989,668METHOD FOR DIRECT OPTICAL VISUALIZATION OF GRAPHENE AND ITS NANOSCALE DEFECTS ON TRANSPARENT SUBSTRATES
Wan Li
US
Copyright © 2026 Matter42. All rights reserved.
Patent
Atlas literature
Patent
US 10,989,668Patent drawings and their descriptions. Click a drawing to enlarge it.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
FIG. 2). While offering a unique means to study nanoscale cell- substrate interactions, quantitative interpretation of results has been difficult due to complex …
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 4). No emission filter was used. Objective lenses were an Olympus Uplan Fl 100 x oil- immersion objective (NA ~ 0.9 with iris diaphragm) and an Olympus …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 8). [0077] Besides outstanding contrast, IRM is further characterized by exceptional throughput, low invasive-ness, and ease of operation. Wide-field …
FIG. 9). [0055] In further embodiments, the methods disclosed herein do not need to be performed in vacuo. In yet further embodiments, the methods disclosed …
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 19) due to electron beam. IRM thus uniquely provides nanoscale structural details for graphene on these substrates. [0080] As a key demonstration of the …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 23B-D). [0094] Together, these results show that the oxidation kinetics of graphene is characterized by an oxidant concentration-dependent autocatalytic …
FIG. 24A), suggesting a pseudo-first-order reaction mechanism in which the reaction rate is directly proportional to the remaining reaction sites in the …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
Claims define the patent's legal scope. Independent claims stand alone; dependent claims (nested) narrow them. Click a claim to expand its dependents.
A method for a direct optical visualization of graphene and its nanoscale defects comprising: preparing a sample comprising graphene on a transparent substrate; overlaying the sample with a liquid medium; and imaging the sample using interference reflection microscopy (IRM). Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process without PMMA protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using thermal release tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using transparent adhesive tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the liquid medium is water, isopropanol, ethanol, methanol, or an organic solvent. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the IRM is performed using a conventional wide-field epifluorescence microscope equipped with a standard lamp for fluorescence microscopy and an oil-immersed objective lens. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the intensity of reflected light is determined using the following equation: SVG 16312990.12-11-2020.KIKR₅₄NKLDFLYX7.CLM.1.svg 0.49 1.9 Black and white Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method provides one or more of the following advantages: ultrahigh contrast for graphene (30-40% or higher contrast per graphene layer); accurate determination of local layer numbers; ultrahigh contrast for nanoscale structures and defects; provides image contrasts >10-fold better than scannin g electron microscopy J SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM }; can be used with rough and non-conductive substrates; ultrahigh throughput that is only limited by camera frame rate; label-free and/or non-invasive; keeps the sample intact during imaging; and/or does not require vacuum or sophisticated optics. Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used in one or more of the following applications: ultrahigh-throughput, ultrahigh-contrast inspection of the quality of graphene for nanoscale defects over large areas; locating and identifying graphene films or pre-patterned graphene structures during fabrication; characterization of nanoscale defects in graphene during nanofabrication processes; in situ characterization of how graphene-based flexible electronics fails under mechanical stresses; in situ monitoring of the oxidation and reduction process on graphene or graphene oxide; monitoring chemical reactions that cause changes in the index of refraction of graphene; and direct visualization of how graphene-based electronics break down due to current overload or electrostatic discharge (ESD). Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used to quantify local oxidation degree of graphene with IRM contrast. Original
Materials described outside the worked examples.
graphene
water
H₂O
Measurements and analyses referenced in the patent, with their drawing references.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
Performance values and ranges asserted in the specification or claims.
| Property | Value | Material |
|---|---|---|
Thickness | 25–140 nm | — |
Duration |
Related documents with shared materials, methods, properties, or citations.
Patent
Atlas literature
Patent
US 10,989,668Patent drawings and their descriptions. Click a drawing to enlarge it.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
FIG. 2). While offering a unique means to study nanoscale cell- substrate interactions, quantitative interpretation of results has been difficult due to complex …
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 4). No emission filter was used. Objective lenses were an Olympus Uplan Fl 100 x oil- immersion objective (NA ~ 0.9 with iris diaphragm) and an Olympus …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 8). [0077] Besides outstanding contrast, IRM is further characterized by exceptional throughput, low invasive-ness, and ease of operation. Wide-field …
FIG. 9). [0055] In further embodiments, the methods disclosed herein do not need to be performed in vacuo. In yet further embodiments, the methods disclosed …
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 19) due to electron beam. IRM thus uniquely provides nanoscale structural details for graphene on these substrates. [0080] As a key demonstration of the …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 23B-D). [0094] Together, these results show that the oxidation kinetics of graphene is characterized by an oxidant concentration-dependent autocatalytic …
FIG. 24A), suggesting a pseudo-first-order reaction mechanism in which the reaction rate is directly proportional to the remaining reaction sites in the …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
Claims define the patent's legal scope. Independent claims stand alone; dependent claims (nested) narrow them. Click a claim to expand its dependents.
A method for a direct optical visualization of graphene and its nanoscale defects comprising: preparing a sample comprising graphene on a transparent substrate; overlaying the sample with a liquid medium; and imaging the sample using interference reflection microscopy (IRM). Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process without PMMA protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using thermal release tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using transparent adhesive tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the liquid medium is water, isopropanol, ethanol, methanol, or an organic solvent. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the IRM is performed using a conventional wide-field epifluorescence microscope equipped with a standard lamp for fluorescence microscopy and an oil-immersed objective lens. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the intensity of reflected light is determined using the following equation: SVG 16312990.12-11-2020.KIKR₅₄NKLDFLYX7.CLM.1.svg 0.49 1.9 Black and white Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method provides one or more of the following advantages: ultrahigh contrast for graphene (30-40% or higher contrast per graphene layer); accurate determination of local layer numbers; ultrahigh contrast for nanoscale structures and defects; provides image contrasts >10-fold better than scannin g electron microscopy J SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM }; can be used with rough and non-conductive substrates; ultrahigh throughput that is only limited by camera frame rate; label-free and/or non-invasive; keeps the sample intact during imaging; and/or does not require vacuum or sophisticated optics. Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used in one or more of the following applications: ultrahigh-throughput, ultrahigh-contrast inspection of the quality of graphene for nanoscale defects over large areas; locating and identifying graphene films or pre-patterned graphene structures during fabrication; characterization of nanoscale defects in graphene during nanofabrication processes; in situ characterization of how graphene-based flexible electronics fails under mechanical stresses; in situ monitoring of the oxidation and reduction process on graphene or graphene oxide; monitoring chemical reactions that cause changes in the index of refraction of graphene; and direct visualization of how graphene-based electronics break down due to current overload or electrostatic discharge (ESD). Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used to quantify local oxidation degree of graphene with IRM contrast. Original
Materials described outside the worked examples.
graphene
water
H₂O
Measurements and analyses referenced in the patent, with their drawing references.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
Performance values and ranges asserted in the specification or claims.
| Property | Value | Material |
|---|---|---|
Thickness | 25–140 nm | — |
Duration |
Related documents with shared materials, methods, properties, or citations.
Patent
Atlas literature
Patent
US 10,989,668Patent drawings and their descriptions. Click a drawing to enlarge it.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
FIG. 2). While offering a unique means to study nanoscale cell- substrate interactions, quantitative interpretation of results has been difficult due to complex …
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 4). No emission filter was used. Objective lenses were an Olympus Uplan Fl 100 x oil- immersion objective (NA ~ 0.9 with iris diaphragm) and an Olympus …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 8). [0077] Besides outstanding contrast, IRM is further characterized by exceptional throughput, low invasive-ness, and ease of operation. Wide-field …
FIG. 9). [0055] In further embodiments, the methods disclosed herein do not need to be performed in vacuo. In yet further embodiments, the methods disclosed …
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 19) due to electron beam. IRM thus uniquely provides nanoscale structural details for graphene on these substrates. [0080] As a key demonstration of the …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 23B-D). [0094] Together, these results show that the oxidation kinetics of graphene is characterized by an oxidant concentration-dependent autocatalytic …
FIG. 24A), suggesting a pseudo-first-order reaction mechanism in which the reaction rate is directly proportional to the remaining reaction sites in the …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
Claims define the patent's legal scope. Independent claims stand alone; dependent claims (nested) narrow them. Click a claim to expand its dependents.
A method for a direct optical visualization of graphene and its nanoscale defects comprising: preparing a sample comprising graphene on a transparent substrate; overlaying the sample with a liquid medium; and imaging the sample using interference reflection microscopy (IRM). Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process without PMMA protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using thermal release tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using transparent adhesive tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the liquid medium is water, isopropanol, ethanol, methanol, or an organic solvent. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the IRM is performed using a conventional wide-field epifluorescence microscope equipped with a standard lamp for fluorescence microscopy and an oil-immersed objective lens. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the intensity of reflected light is determined using the following equation: SVG 16312990.12-11-2020.KIKR₅₄NKLDFLYX7.CLM.1.svg 0.49 1.9 Black and white Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method provides one or more of the following advantages: ultrahigh contrast for graphene (30-40% or higher contrast per graphene layer); accurate determination of local layer numbers; ultrahigh contrast for nanoscale structures and defects; provides image contrasts >10-fold better than scannin g electron microscopy J SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM }; can be used with rough and non-conductive substrates; ultrahigh throughput that is only limited by camera frame rate; label-free and/or non-invasive; keeps the sample intact during imaging; and/or does not require vacuum or sophisticated optics. Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used in one or more of the following applications: ultrahigh-throughput, ultrahigh-contrast inspection of the quality of graphene for nanoscale defects over large areas; locating and identifying graphene films or pre-patterned graphene structures during fabrication; characterization of nanoscale defects in graphene during nanofabrication processes; in situ characterization of how graphene-based flexible electronics fails under mechanical stresses; in situ monitoring of the oxidation and reduction process on graphene or graphene oxide; monitoring chemical reactions that cause changes in the index of refraction of graphene; and direct visualization of how graphene-based electronics break down due to current overload or electrostatic discharge (ESD). Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used to quantify local oxidation degree of graphene with IRM contrast. Original
Materials described outside the worked examples.
graphene
water
H₂O
Measurements and analyses referenced in the patent, with their drawing references.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
Performance values and ranges asserted in the specification or claims.
| Property | Value | Material |
|---|---|---|
Thickness | 25–140 nm | — |
Duration |
Related documents with shared materials, methods, properties, or citations.
Patent
Atlas literature
Patent
US 10,989,668Patent drawings and their descriptions. Click a drawing to enlarge it.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
FIG. 2). While offering a unique means to study nanoscale cell- substrate interactions, quantitative interpretation of results has been difficult due to complex …
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 4). No emission filter was used. Objective lenses were an Olympus Uplan Fl 100 x oil- immersion objective (NA ~ 0.9 with iris diaphragm) and an Olympus …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 8). [0077] Besides outstanding contrast, IRM is further characterized by exceptional throughput, low invasive-ness, and ease of operation. Wide-field …
FIG. 9). [0055] In further embodiments, the methods disclosed herein do not need to be performed in vacuo. In yet further embodiments, the methods disclosed …
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 19) due to electron beam. IRM thus uniquely provides nanoscale structural details for graphene on these substrates. [0080] As a key demonstration of the …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 23B-D). [0094] Together, these results show that the oxidation kinetics of graphene is characterized by an oxidant concentration-dependent autocatalytic …
FIG. 24A), suggesting a pseudo-first-order reaction mechanism in which the reaction rate is directly proportional to the remaining reaction sites in the …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
Claims define the patent's legal scope. Independent claims stand alone; dependent claims (nested) narrow them. Click a claim to expand its dependents.
A method for a direct optical visualization of graphene and its nanoscale defects comprising: preparing a sample comprising graphene on a transparent substrate; overlaying the sample with a liquid medium; and imaging the sample using interference reflection microscopy (IRM). Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a wet- transfer process without PMMA protection. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using thermal release tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the sample is prepared by transferring one or more layers of graphene to a transparent substrate using a dry- transfer process using transparent adhesive tape. Original
The method of claim 1, wherein the liquid medium is water, isopropanol, ethanol, methanol, or an organic solvent. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the IRM is performed using a conventional wide-field epifluorescence microscope equipped with a standard lamp for fluorescence microscopy and an oil-immersed objective lens. Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the intensity of reflected light is determined using the following equation: SVG 16312990.12-11-2020.KIKR₅₄NKLDFLYX7.CLM.1.svg 0.49 1.9 Black and white Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method provides one or more of the following advantages: ultrahigh contrast for graphene (30-40% or higher contrast per graphene layer); accurate determination of local layer numbers; ultrahigh contrast for nanoscale structures and defects; provides image contrasts >10-fold better than scannin g electron microscopy J SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM }; can be used with rough and non-conductive substrates; ultrahigh throughput that is only limited by camera frame rate; label-free and/or non-invasive; keeps the sample intact during imaging; and/or does not require vacuum or sophisticated optics. Currently amended
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used in one or more of the following applications: ultrahigh-throughput, ultrahigh-contrast inspection of the quality of graphene for nanoscale defects over large areas; locating and identifying graphene films or pre-patterned graphene structures during fabrication; characterization of nanoscale defects in graphene during nanofabrication processes; in situ characterization of how graphene-based flexible electronics fails under mechanical stresses; in situ monitoring of the oxidation and reduction process on graphene or graphene oxide; monitoring chemical reactions that cause changes in the index of refraction of graphene; and direct visualization of how graphene-based electronics break down due to current overload or electrostatic discharge (ESD). Previously presented
The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used to quantify local oxidation degree of graphene with IRM contrast. Original
Materials described outside the worked examples.
graphene
water
H₂O
Measurements and analyses referenced in the patent, with their drawing references.
FIG. 1) was comprised of three sub units, namely a homebuilt tensile-testing station to apply uniaxial strain, IRM to monitor in situ structural changes in …
Performance values and ranges asserted in the specification or claims.
| Property | Value | Material |
|---|---|---|
Thickness | 25–140 nm | — |
Duration |
Related documents with shared materials, methods, properties, or citations.
polymethyl methacrylate
copper foil
Cu
ferric chloride
FeCl₃
isopropanol
C₃H₈O
ethanol
C₂H₅OH
methanol
CH₃OH
graphene oxide
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
| — |
Duration | 5–10 minutes | — |
Thickness | ≤ 10 nm | — |
Thickness | ≤ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 10 nm | — |
polymethyl methacrylate
copper foil
Cu
ferric chloride
FeCl₃
isopropanol
C₃H₈O
ethanol
C₂H₅OH
methanol
CH₃OH
graphene oxide
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
| — |
Duration | 5–10 minutes | — |
Thickness | ≤ 10 nm | — |
Thickness | ≤ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 10 nm | — |
polymethyl methacrylate
copper foil
Cu
ferric chloride
FeCl₃
isopropanol
C₃H₈O
ethanol
C₂H₅OH
methanol
CH₃OH
graphene oxide
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
| — |
Duration | 5–10 minutes | — |
Thickness | ≤ 10 nm | — |
Thickness | ≤ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 10 nm | — |
polymethyl methacrylate
copper foil
Cu
ferric chloride
FeCl₃
isopropanol
C₃H₈O
ethanol
C₂H₅OH
methanol
CH₃OH
graphene oxide
FIG. 3A. Incident light of wavelength A and intensity I r enters the sample from the substrate side, successively encounters graphene and top medium, and …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 5D, E and F). For example, thinner wrinkles and cracks that are clearly resolved using IRM, are hardly observable using SEM; while using AFM, bilayers are …
FIG. 6), which was selected for comparison with IRM results. [0067] AFM images were taken on an Asylum MFP-3D system in tapping mode using aluminum-coated …
FIG. 7). [0075] AFM also yielded structural information consistent with IRM but at much reduced contrast (see
FIG. 10 A, B, and H) is respectively observed for monolayers on quartz and CaF 2 substrates, which for their superior optical properties have been often …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 20K and L). [0081] The IRM results reveal that for graphene, strain-induced nano-cracks are largely, but not strictly (as found in metal oxide films), …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 21A), indicating greater local reaction progresses. XPS results showed ~20% graphene oxidation for samples similarly prepared on a silicon substrate, …
FIG. 22H). This unique reaction propagation mechanism of the two-dimensional graphene system is reminiscent of two-dimensional crystal growth at nucleation …
FIG. 25C). A sudden jump in reaction rate was noted, thus pinpointing pH as a key parameter of the reaction. In comparison, Raman spectroscopy only showed …
| — |
Duration | 5–10 minutes | — |
Thickness | ≤ 10 nm | — |
Thickness | ≤ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 1 nm | — |
Thickness | ≥ 10 nm | — |