Abstract
The results of studying the effect of geometric and thermodynamic parameters of thermal evaporation and copper deposition on graphene lying on the Cu(111) surface on the adsorption of copper atoms, as well as their surface diffusion, are presented. The simulation is carried out by classical molecular dynamics using chains of Nose–Hoover thermostats. Interatomic interactions are determined by the Tersoff–Brenner, Rosato–Guillope–Legrand, and modified Morse potentials. A simple criterion for the thermalization of adatoms on graphene lying on a Cu(111) surface is formulated and tested. The average length and the mean free path time of the copper atom before and after thermalization at low (7 K) and room temperatures are studied for two evaporation temperatures. The probability of adsorption of the copper atom is found. The distributions along the directions of motion of adatoms during equilibrium diffusion are constructed. The distributions of the free path length and time are shown to have an exponential form. The influence of the Cu(111) substrate on the diffusion of the Cu atom on graphene is studied. The results obtained can be used to simulate the growth of copper nanoclusters on graphene by the kinetic Monte Carlo method.
REFERENCES
P. R. Wallace, Phys. Rev. 71 (9), 622 (1947). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrev.71.622
K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S. V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva, and A. A. Firsov, Science 306, 306 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1102896
K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, M. I. Katsnelson, I. V. Grigorieva, S. V. Dubonos, and A. A. Firsov, Nature 438, 197 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04233
A. H. Castro Neto, F. Guinea, N. M. R. Peres, K. S. Novoselov, and A. K. Geim, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 109 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2010.07.003
M. A. H. Vozmediano, M. I. Katsnelson, and F. Guinea, Phys. Rep. 496 (4–5), 109 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2010.07.003
E. Nakhmedov, E. Nadimi, S. Vedaei, O. Alekperov, F. Tatardar, A. I. Najafov, I. I. Abbasov, and A. M. Saletsky, Phys. Rev. B 99, 125125 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.99.125125
Zh. Zheng, Qi. Ma, Zh. Bi, S. Barrera, M.-H. Liu, N. Mao, Ya. Zhang, N. Kiper, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Kong, W. A. Tisdale, R. Ashoori, N. Gedik, L. Fu, S.-Ya. Xu, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nature 588, 71 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2970-9
H. Zhou, W. J. Yu, L. Liu, R. Cheng, Y. Chen, X. Huang, Y. Liu, Y. Wang, Y. Huang, and X. Duan, Nat. Commun. 4, 2096 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3096
G. Giovannetti, P. A. Khomyakov, G. Brocks, V. M. Karpan, J. Brink, and P. J. Kelly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 026803 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.026803
Z. Lu, Ya. Wang, J. Chen, J. Wang, Ye, Zhou, and S.‑T. Han, Chem. Rev. 120, 3941 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00730
V. M. Karpan, G. Giovannetti, P. A. Khomyakov, M. Talanana, A. A. Starikov, M. Zwierzycki, J. Brink, G. Brocks, and P. J. Kelly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 176602 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.176602
P. Sule, M. Szendro, C. Hwang, and L. Tapaszto, Carbon 77, 1082 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2014.06.024
X. Shi, Q. Yin, and Y. Wei, Carbon 50, 3055 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2012.02.092
X. Liu, Y. Han, J. W. Evans, A. K. Engstfeld, R. J. Behm, M. C. Tringides, M. Hupalo, H.-Q. Lin, L. Huang, K.-M. Ho, D. Appy, P. A. Thiel, and C.‑Z. Wang, Progr. Surf. Sci. 90, 397 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progsurf.2015.07.001
E. Soy, Z. Liang, and M. Trenary, J. Phys. Chem. C 119 (44), 24796 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b06472
E. Soy, N. Guisinger, and M. Trenary, J. Phys. Chem. B 122 (2), 572 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.7b05064
K. Takahashi, 2D Mater. 2 (1), 014001 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1583/2/1/014001
S. V. Kolesnikov, A. V. Sidorenkov, and A. M. Saletsky, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 111 (2), 101 (2020). https://doi.org/10.31857/S0370274X20020095
T. Schlick, Molecular Modeling and Simulation (Springer, 2002).
W. G. Hoover, Phys. Rev. A 31 (3), 1695 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.31.1695
G. J. Martina, M. E. Tuckerman, D. J. Tobias, and M. L. Klein, Mol. Phys. 87 (5), 1117 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1080/00268979600100761
J. Tersoff, Phys. Rev. B. 37 (12), 6991 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.37.6991
D. W. Brenner, Phys. Rev. B 42 (15), 9458 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.42.9458
V. Rosato, M. Guillope, and B. Legrand, Philos. Mag. A 59 (2), 2321 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1080/01418618908205062
N. N. Negulyaev, V. S. Stepanyuk, P. Bruno, L. Diekhoner, P. Wahl, and K. Kern, Phys. Rev. B 77, 125437 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.77.125437
S. V. Kolesnikov, A. M. Saletsky, S. A. Dokukin, and A. L. Klavsyuk, Mat. Model. 30 (2), 48 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1134/S2070048218050071
Funding
This work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (grant no. 21-72-20034).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The authors of this work declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note.
Pleiades Publishing remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Khudyakov, S.V., Kolesnikov, S.V. & Saletsky, A.M. Molecular Dynamics Simulation of the Diffusion of a Copper Atom on Graphene. J. Surf. Investig. 18, 160–165 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1027451024010270
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1027451024010270