JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS 108, 044502 2010

Corrected eld enhancement factor for the oating sphere model of carbon nanotube emitter
Evgeny G. Pogorelov,1 Yia-Chung Chang,1 Alexander I. Zhbanov,2,a and Yong-Gu Lee2
1

Research Center for Applied Sciences, Academia Sinica, 128, Section 2, Academia Road Nankang, Taipei 115, Taiwan 2 Department of Mechatronics, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST), 1 Oryong-dong, Bukgu, Gwangju 500-712, Republic of Korea

Received 18 March 2010; accepted 24 June 2010; published online 17 August 2010 We have corrected the eld enhancement factor for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model with the nite anode-cathode distance. If is the radius of sphere, h is the distance from cathode to the center of sphere, and l is the distance from the center to the anode, then the eld enhancement factor is given as the following expression sph = 2 + 7 2 2 2 + 2 / 2 1 2 , where = / h, = / l. This expression demonstrates reasonable behavior for three limiting cases: if h , if l , and if l . We have compared our factor sph with the eld enhancement factor tube for the hemisphere on a post model and the factor ell for the hemiellipsoid on plane model. We have shown realization of the approximate evaluation tube sph + ell / 2. 2010 American Institute of Physics. doi:10.1063/1.3466992
I. INTRODUCTION
0 example Refs. 2224 , yielding hemi = 3. This solution is very useful as a limit case for all other models under consideration when h = 0. The analytical approximation for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model22,23 in the case L and 1 is H/ 0 sph

Since the rst reports on remarkable eld emission properties of carbon nanotubes CNTs Refs. 13 in 1994 and the rst journal papers dedicated to this problem47 in 1995, signicant efforts have been devoted to the application of CNTs for electron sources. Now area of its practical application includes a wide range of eld-emission-based devices such as at-panel displays,810 backlight unit for a liquid crystal displays,11,12 electron microscopes,13 vacuum microwave ampliers,14,15 x-ray tube sources,16,17 cathode-ray lamps,18,19 nanolithography systems,20,21 etc. The electric eld Etop at the CNT tip increases compared with the average eld E0 according to the expression Etop = E0, where is a eld enhancement factor. The emission current is very sensitive to the eld enhancement factor which rises up to 3000 or more depending on the tube aspect ratio. Four of the simplest models for calculation the eld enhancement factor are the hemisphere on a plane model, the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model, the hemiellipsoid on plane model, and the hemisphere on a post model. We follow to the classication suggested by Forbes et al.22 The schemes of models in diode conguration are illustrated in Fig. 1, where L is the anode-cathode distance; H is the total height of emitters; is the radius of spheres or radius of curvature for hemiellipsoid; h is the distance from cathode to sphere centers or distance to focus for hemiellipsoid; and l = L h. Three rst models allow analytical solutions. Simpler is the case when the anode-cathode distances, L are much larger than the height of emitters, H. In the case of innite anode-cathode distance, L the hemisphere on a plane model can be analyzed exactly for
a

+ 2.5.

Unfortunately this approach does not work well for tubes of small aspect ratio. The exact analytical solution for the hemisphere on a plane model22,24 is as follows:
0 ell =

2 1
2

ln

1+ 2 1

where = 1 / H is the eccentricity of ellipse.

Electronic mail: azhbanov@gate.sinica.edu.tw.

FIG. 1. Color online Schemes of simplest models for eld enhancement factor estimation: a hemisphere on a plane; b oating sphere at emitterplane potential, c hemiellipsoid on a plane, and d hemisphere on a post. 108, 044502-1 2010 American Institute of Physics

0021-8979/2010/108 4 /044502/7/$30.00

Downloaded 03 Mar 2011 to 157.253.29.122. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

044502-2

Pogorelov et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 108, 044502 2010

The model of a hemisphere on a post allows only the numerical solution even in the case of innite anode-cathode distance, L . There are many numerical results obtained by various researchers which have been generalized by simple algebraic formulas of eld enhancement factor for an individual nanotube and assembly of nanotubes. The main problem for such algebraic tting formulas is the lack of a denitive proof of their accuracy. The very accurate and popular formula belongs to Edgcombe et al.22,25,26
0 tube

1.2

0.9

+ 2.5

FIG. 2. Color online Two conducting spheres of radius tential in uniform electric E0.

at cathode po-

All these factors submit to common sense

0 sph 0 tube 0 ell 0 hemi .

II. CALCULATION OF THE ENHANCEMENT FACTOR WITH THE INFINITE ANODE-CATHODE DISTANCE A. Hemisphere on a plane

In the case of large anode-cathode distance, L comparison of eld enhancement factors for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model, the hemiellipsoid on plane model, and tting formula for the hemisphere on a post model gives us the approximate relation
0 tube 0 sph + 0 ell

The metallic sphere in a uniform electric eld E0 Fig. 1 a was considered in many papers for example Refs. 2224 . We can replace the sphere by point electric dipole. If the electric dipole moment is p0 then the dipole potential is
dip =

p0 4
0

z z + r2
2

3/2 .

Next case is the case of a diode conguration when the anode-cathode distances, L is comparable with the height of emitters, H. For the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model Wang et al.23 supposed the analytical approximation
sph 0 sph +

1.202

h L

Equation of circle is dip + zE0 = 0. From this equation, we can nd the relation between the electric dipole moment and the sphere radius: p0 = 4 0E0 3. The electric eld on the top of hemisphere reaches Etop = p0 / 2 0 3 + E0 = 3E0. The eld 0 enhancement factor is hemi = Etop / E0 = 3. The eld distribution over the hyperboloid surface have the form E = 3E0 cos , where is a polar angle.

The Eq. 6 is accurate enough for H 0.5L. If the anode0 cathode distance tends to innity, L then sph sph, that is right. If the oating sphere touches with anode then the eld enhancement factor must tend to innity. According to Eq. 6 , if H L then sph = H / + 3.702 is the limited value that is incorrect. For the hemisphere on a post model in diode conguration Bonard et al.27 introduced numerically tted formula
tube

B. Floating sphere at emitter-plane potential

1.2

0.9

+ 2.5 LH L

1 + 0.013 .

LH L

0.033

The Eq. 7 demonstrates reasonable behavior for both limit 0 cases: if L then tube tube; if H L then tube . The inequality 4 has to be true for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model and the hemisphere on a post model in diode conguration, sph tube. For some sets of parameters, we can show the violation of this inequality. Thus we assume that Eq. 7 is not perfectly correct. In the present work we reexamine the eld enhancement factor for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model with the innite and nite anode-cathode distance to solve the problem mentioned above.

The oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model has no body of the eld emitter and possesses only its head. This model gives too high estimation of electric eld on the apex of nanotube but plausibly reproduce tendencies of change in the eld enhancement factor. Approximate analytical solution for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model is well known for example, Refs. 22 and 23 . To solve this problem the method of images28 is usually used. The charge q0 = 4 0hE0 and the electric dipole p0 = 4 0E0 3 placed at point A Fig. 2 create a sphere of radius and potential = 0 in uniform external electric eld. The charge q0 and dipole p0 cause a potential variation across the emitter plane. To correct this we have to place an image-charge q0 and image-dipole p0 at point A behind the emitter plane. The image-charge and image-dipole will distort the surface of sphere. To restore the shape we should place additional charge q1 = q0 / 2h and dipole p1 = p0 3 / 8h3 at point B on the distance s1 = 2 / 2h from the center of sphere see Fig. 2 . Next, we have to put q1 and p1 at point B , after to put q2 and p2 at C and so on. Neglecting terms of higher smallness in this series of approximation we nd the electric eld on the top of oating sphere

Downloaded 03 Mar 2011 to 157.253.29.122. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

044502-3

Pogorelov et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 108, 044502 2010

Etop =

1 q0 4 E0
0 2

2p0 1 1 3 + 4 0 4

q1 s1 +

+ + E0 9

+ 3.5 .

In the expression 9 , we assume s1 0 and neglect the charges q2, q3 , . . ., and the dipoles p1, p2 , . . .. So we accept the idea of charge centralization in the center of sphere and use only the initial charge q0, the image-charge q1, and the initial dipole p0. Thus, the eld enhancement factor is
0 sph =

FIG. 3. Color online Innite set of image charges for the simulation of a planar anode.

Etop E0

+ 3.5 =

+ 2.5.

10

The initial charge q0 gives us h / , the image-charge q1 brings 2, the initial dipole p0 adds 1/2, and the external electric eld E0 contributes 1 to the eld enhancement factor. We can provide more accurate calculations. Recurring formulas for the distance si+1, the charge qi+1, and the dipole moment pi+1 through si, qi, and pi are the following si+1 = 2 / 2h si , pi+1 = pi 3 / 2h si 3, and qi+1 = qi / 2h si pi / 2h si 2, where the initial distance is zero: s0 = 0. Lets note here that the dipole pi causes not only an image-dipole pi+1 but also an additional charge pi / 2h si 2. The exact analytical expression for the eld enhancement factor is as follows
ex sph =

spacing, 2L. It is clear that planes z = 0 and z = L are planes of symmetry for point charges and will have potentials 0 on cathode and V = E0L on anode. We consider the central sphere between the anode and the cathode and also its two nearest neighbors separately. These three spheres are marked in Fig. 3 by red circles. The electrostatic potential created by all right image charges at point T is
right =

q 4
0 n=0

1 1 2 l+ n+1 L 2L n + 1 1 + l/L + , L 13

q 8
0

1+
i=0

q i

p i

11

0.57722 is the Euler where is digamma function, Mascheroni constant. The electrostatic potential created by all left charges is
left =

q where + si 2 1 / 2h + si 2 and 0E 0 1 / i = qi / 4 p 3 = 2pi / 4 0E0 1 / + si + 1 / 2h + si 3 . i Series expansion of the exact eld enhancement factor is ex sph = 1

q 4
0 n=0

1 1 2 h+ n+1 L 2L n + 1 1 + h/L + . L 14

7 1 1 + + 2 2 8
6

7 + 16

25 32

25 + 32

= 12

q 8
0

+O

The external potential from left and right sets of image charges is
ext = right + left =

where = / h. We can see that exact analytical value of the eld enex 0 hancement factor, sph is very close to approximate one, sph. Larger difference takes place for a smaller aspect ratio. The method of images does not suppose penetration of sphere into the cathode. We can consider only point contact between sphere and emitter plane. In the limit case h = , we calcuex 0 lated that sph = 4.207 and sph = 4.5. Thus, the approximate 0 value of the eld enhancement factor, sph gives us accurate estimation from above.
III. INFLUENCE OF THE FINITE ANODE-CATHODE DISTANCE ON THE FIELD ENHANCEMENT FACTOR

q 8
0

1 + l/L + L

1 + h/L 2

. 15

We shall take into account only inuence of the point dipole placed at the central sphere and neglect all others. The potential created by a dipole at point T is
dip =

p0 4
0

2.

16

The presence of a at anode placed at a distance comparable with the height of the nanotube has strong inuence on the eld enhancement factor. To estimate the inuence of the nite anode-cathode distance, we accept the idea of charge centralization in the center of sphere. The basic conception of calculation consists in replacement of the cathode and the anode by an innite set of image charges as shown in Fig. 3. The negative and positive charges have the same

As the oating sphere has cathode potential we should equate to a zero the total potential created by a uniform electric eld, all electrical charges, and a dipole in point T as the following: E0 h + = 0. +
ext

q 4
0

1 2l

1 2h +

p0 4
0 2

17

Substituting in Eq. 17 , the dipole moment, p0 = 4 0E0 3 and the external potential ext from Eq. 15 and solving equality

Downloaded 03 Mar 2011 to 157.253.29.122. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

044502-4

Pogorelov et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 108, 044502 2010

E 0h

q 8 q 4
0 0

1 + l/L + L 1 1 2l

1 + h/L + 2 1 2h +

Etop = E0 18 + 1 2h +

ext

z
2

+
z=h+

q 4
3 0

1
2

1 2l

= 0,

1 2p0 4
0

20

we nd the electric charge at the center of oating sphere q=8

0E 0h

1 + l/L + L
1

1 + h/L + 2

It is easy to show that in a small neighborhood of point T the 0 external potential ext changes slowly, ext / z z=h+ therefore we neglect a partial derivative in Eq. 20 . Thus, the electric eld at point T is Etop = q 4
0

2 2l

2 2h +

1
2

19

1 2l

1 2h +

+ 3E0 .

21

The electric eld at the top of sphere is

Introducing the dimensionless parameters = h / L, we nd the eld enhancement factor

= / h and

2
sph =

Etop = E0

2 2

2 +2 +

2 2+ 2 2

1+

2 2 2+

+ 3.

22

In the limit 0, we have the case of innite anode-cathode distance. The series expansion in small parameter gives us 0 sph 1 / + 7 / 2, what coincides with Eq. 1 and 10 . The expansion of our solution 22 in two small parameters and gives the approximation of Wang et al.23 1
sph

The divergence becomes very large when the sphere closely approaches to the anode. We used to this illustration = 0.005 but behavior is the same for other ratios / h.

7 + 2

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

23

A. Comparison of enhancement factors for the innite anode-cathode distance

is the zeta function, 3 = 1 + 1 / 23 + 1 / 33 + 1 / 43 where + . . . 1.20206. In Fig. 4, we see that Wangs approximation works very well in the case h 0.6L.

Comparison of eld enhancement factors for the oating sphere at emitter-plane-potential model green solid line , the hemiellipsoid on plane model red dashed-anddotted line , and tting formula for the hemisphere on a post model blue dashed line is shown in Fig. 5. The purple 0 0 dotted line corresponds to sph + ell / 2. We see realization of the inequality 4 . Also we can conclude that approximate equality 5 is satised with very good accuracy.

B. The eld enhancement factors for the nite anodecathode distance

FIG. 4. Color online Comparison of our solution 24 with the approximation of Wang et al. Ref. 8 for the eld enhancement factor vs = h / L.

Lets consider the behavior of eld enhancement factors for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model, the hemiellipsoid on plane model, and the hemisphere on a post model with nite anode-cathode distance. We will use Eq. 22 for the oating sphere at emitterplane potential model and Eq. 7 for the hemisphere on a post model. For the hemisphere on a plane model with nite anode-cathode distance we will apply the analytical approximation supposed by Pogorelov et al.24

Downloaded 03 Mar 2011 to 157.253.29.122. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

044502-5

Pogorelov et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 108, 044502 2010

FIG. 5. Color online The eld enhancement factors vs aspect ratio for three models: oating sphere green solid line , hemi-ellipsoid red dashedand-dotted line , and hemisphere on a post blue dashed line . The purple dotted line is average between the oating sphere and the hemiellipsoid.

ell =

1 where P=
n=1

2 3 , 1+ ln 2 P 1

24

2n 1 ln 2n + 1 + 2n + 1

2n 1 + 2n 2n 1

+ 1 ln and

= L / H. For comparison of factors, we have two limiting cases. The rst limit corresponds to the hemisphere on a plane model with innite anode-cathode distance when h = 0, L , and = 3. The second limit arises if the gap between the anode and the apex of the emitter is very small as shown in Fig. 6. In this case, we can consider a gap between the anode and the emitter as the parallel-plate capacitor. Local eld near the apex is Etop = V / l , where V is applied voltage. The average eld is E0 = V / L. Thus, the asymptote for eld enhancement factor is

FIG. 7. Color online Comparison of the eld enhancement factors for three models: a the anode-cathode distance, L is changing, = 0.005; b the height of emitter, H is changing, / L = 0.005. The purple dotted line is the asymptote.

asym =

1 L = l l

25

The eld enhancement factors have to approach to this asymptotic curve from above. Also all factors must submit to clear inequality
sph tube ell asym ,

26

FIG. 6. Color online Illustration of small distance between the anode and the top of the emitter

which is similar to inequality 4 for innite anode-cathode distance. Comparison of eld enhancement factors is shown in Fig. 7. The purple dotted line corresponds to the asymtotic eld enhancement factor asym. Color and style of other lines are same as in Fig. 5. If we keep the height and the radius of emitters and we vary the anode-cathode distance, then the eld enhancement factors change how it is shown in Fig. 7 a . Change in the eld enhancement factors with change in the height of emitter is shown in Fig. 7 b . We see that all functions demon-

Downloaded 03 Mar 2011 to 157.253.29.122. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

044502-6

Pogorelov et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 108, 044502 2010

strate right behavior for two limiting cases: h = 0 and H = L. The approximate equation tube sph + ell / 2 is carried out 0.8. in a wide range 0 Despite of validity of inequality 26 for full diapason 1, we see in Fig. 7 that if 0.97, then tube 0 sph. In other words, if the gap between the emitter apex and the anode is small, then the eld enhancement factor for the hemisphere on a post model exceeds the eld enhancement factor for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model. For example, if nanotube emitter have radius of 1 nm and length of 1 m then according to our model in the diode conguration with cathode-anode distance 1.5 m the eld enhancement factor sph is 1004.5, the factor tube for the Bonards model27 is 620.3, and the factor ell for the hemiellipsoid on plane24 model is 326.6. The approximate equality is satised with quite good accuracy, tube 1004.5 + 326.6 / 2 = 665.5. For smaller cathode-anode distance of we have sph = 1030.6, tube = 1024.0, and ell 1.02 = 478.6. We see sph tube, that contradicts common sense. Thus we believe arithmetical mean 1030.6 tube + 478.6 / 2 = 754.6 gives more reasonable value for short cathode-anode distance. We assume that our Eq. 22 is accurate enough but Eq. 7 overestimates the eld enhancement factor for small gap between the emitter and the anode.

sph =

2 +2 . 1 2

29

Thus, the eld enhancement factor for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model with the innite anodecathode distance has the form
sph =

2+7 2 2 1

2 +2 . 2

30

This eld enhancement factor is very close to the factor from Eq. 22 , sph sph. Distinction between these two factors is invisible in Fig. 7, they coalesce in one line. It is remarkable, that Eq. 30 allows us to solve the second problem mentioned above. The eld enhancement factor sph tends to innity if l or H L.
V. CONCLUSIONS

C. Simplication for the oating sphere at emitterplane potential model

Our Eq. 22 for the eld enhancement factor holds two disadvantages. First, this expression is very complicated for fast estimations. For example, it is impossible to nd sph by using the usual scientic calculator. Second, the eld enhancement factor from Eq. 22 tends to innity not if H = L but if H = L + / 2. So we have the innite eld enhancement factor only if the oating sphere penetrates into the anode on half of its radius. To solve the rst problem we shall try to express the eld enhancement factor as product of the factor for the innite anode-cathode distance and the correcting multiplier which accounts nite distance between the anode and the 0 cathode, sph = sph sph. This representation is similar to what 27 Bonard et al. used for the hemisphere on a post model in Eq. 7 . We will use the three rst terms of series expansion 12 for the exact eld enhancement factor with innite anodecathode distance
0 sph 1

Using the method of images we have exactly calculated the eld enhancement factor for oating sphere at emitterplane potential model with the innite anode-cathode distance. We have corrected this factor for oating sphere in diode conguration between a at anode and cathode. If we apply the dimensionless parameters = / h and = / l, where is the radius of sphere, h is the distance from cathode to the center of sphere, and l is the distance from the center to the anode, then the eld enhancement factor is given as the following expression sph = 2 + 7 2 2 2 + 2 / 2 1 2 . This expression demonstrates reasonable behavior for limiting cases. If l then sph = h / + 7 / 2 / 2h. If l and h then sph = 4. If l then sph . We have compared the eld enhancement factor sph for the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model, the factor tube for the hemisphere on a post model, and the factor ell for the hemiellipsoid on plane model. We have validated correctness of the inequality sph tube ell. We have shown realization of the approximate evaluation tube sph + ell / 2. Thus, we can conclude that the oating sphere at emitter-plane potential model is reasonable for calculating the enhancement factor of CNT.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

2+7 7 1 = 2 2 2

27

We gratefully acknowledge support through the National Science Council of Taiwan, Republic of China, under grant NSC 98-2112-M-001-022-MY3, the Asian Ofce of Aerospace Research & Development AOARD under grant no. FA2386-09-1-4128, and support given by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea NRF funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology grant no. 2009-0088557 .
1

To obtain the correcting multiplier, we shall nd the limit

sph =

lim

sph 0 . sph

28

0 Substituting sph from Eq. 22 and sph from Eq. 27 into limit 28 and introducing new dimensionless parameter, = / l, we can nd

B. H. Fishbine, C. J. Miglionico, K. E. Hackett, and K. J. Hendricks, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 349, 319 1994 . 2 Y. V. Gulyaev, I. S. Nefyodov, N. I. Sinitsyn, G. V. Torgashov, Y. F. Zakharchenko, and A. I. Zhbanov, 7th International Vacuum Microelectronics Conference, ATRIA, World Trade Center, Grenoble, France, July 415, 1994, pp. 319321. 3 A. G. Rinzler, J. H. Haer, D. T. Colbert, and R. E. Smalley, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 359, 61 1994 .

Downloaded 03 Mar 2011 to 157.253.29.122. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

044502-7
4

Pogorelov et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 108, 044502 2010 Chem. 14, 933 2004 . G. Yue, Q. Qiu, B. Gao, Y. Cheng, J. Zhang, H. Shimoda, S. Chang, J. P. Lu, and O. Zhou, Appl. Phys. Lett. 81, 355 2002 . 17 A. L. Musatov, Y. V. Gulyaev, K. R. Izraelyants, E. F. Kukovitskii, N. A. Kiselev, O. Y. Maslennikov, I. A. Guzilov, A. B. Ormont, and E. G. Chirkova, J. Commun. Technol. Electron. 52, 714 2007 . 18 J. M. Bonard, T. Stckli, O. Noury, and A. Chtelain, Appl. Phys. Lett. 78, 2775 2001 . 19 Y. Saito and S. Uemura, Carbon 38, 169 2000 . 20 W. I. Milne, K. B. K. Teo, M. Chhowalla, G. A. J. Amaratunga, J. Yuan, J. Robertson, P. Legagneax, G. Pirio, K. Bouzehouane, D. Pribat, W. Bruenger, and C. Trautmann, Curr. Appl. Phys. 1, 317 2001 . 21 B. P. Ribaya, J. Leung, P. Brown, M. Rahman, and C. V. Nguyen, Nanotechnology 19, 185201 2008 . 22 R. G. Forbes, C. J. Edgcombe, and U. Valdr, Ultramicroscopy 95, 57 2003 . 23 X. Q. Wang, M. Wang, P. M. He, Y. B. Xu, and Z. H. Li, J. Appl. Phys. 96, 6752 2004 . 24 E. G. Pogorelov, A. I. Zhbanov, and Y. C. Chang, Ultramicroscopy 109, 373 2009 . 25 C. J. Edgcombe and U. Valdr, Solid-State Electron. 45, 857 2001 . 26 C. J. Edgcombe and U. Valdr, Philos. Mag. B 82, 987 2002 . 27 J. M. Bonard, K. A. Dean, B. F. Coll, and C. Klinke, Phys. Rev. Lett., 89, 197602 2002 . 28 J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 3rd ed. Wiley, New York, 1999 .
16

Y. V. Gulyaev, L. A. Chernozatonskii, Z. J. Kosakovskaja, N. I. Sinitsyn, G. V. Torgashov, and Y. F. Zakharchenko, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 13, 435 1995 . 5 L. A. Chernozatonskii, Y. V. Gulyaev, Z. J. Kosakovskaja, N. I. Sinitsyn, G. V. Torgashov, Y. F. Zakharchenko, E. A. Fedorov, and V. P. Valchuk, Chem. Phys. Lett. 233, 63 1995 . 6 A. G. Rinzler, J. H. Hafner, P. Nikolaev, L. Lou, S. G. Kim, D. Tomanek, P. Nordlander, D. T. Colbert, and R. E. Smalley, Science 269, 1550 1995 . 7 W. A. de Heer, A. Chtelain, and D. garte, Science 270, 1179 1995 . 8 Q. H. Wang, A. A. Setlur, J. M. Lauerhaas, J. Y. Dai, E. W. Seelig, and R. P. H. Chang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 72, 2912 1998 . 9 W. B. Choi, D. S. Chung, J. H. Kang, H. Y. Kim, Y. W. Jin, I. T. Han, Y. H. Lee, J. E. Jung, N. S. Lee, G. S. Park, and J. M. Kim, Appl. Phys. Lett. 75, 3129 1999 . 10 A. I. Zhbanov, N. I. Sinitsyn, and G. V. Torgashov, Radiophys. Quantum Electron. 47, 435 2004 . 11 Y. C. Kim and E. H. Yoo, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 2 44, L454 2005 . 12 Y. C. Kim, H. S. Kang, E. Cho, D. Y. Kim, D. S. Chung, I. H. Kim, I. T. Han, and J. M. Kim, Nanotechnology 20, 095204 2009 . 13 N. de Jonge and J. M. Bonard, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 362, 2239 2004 . 14 Y. F. Zakharchenko, G. V. Torgashov, Y. V. Gulyaev, N. I. Sinitsyn, I. S. Nefedov, A. I. Zhbanov, and E. M. Ilin, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 14, 1982 1996 . 15 W. I. Milne, K. B. K. Teo, G. A. J. Amaratunga, P. Legagneux, L. Gangloff, J. P. Schnell, V. V. Semet, V. T. Binh, and O. Groening, J. Mater.

Downloaded 03 Mar 2011 to 157.253.29.122. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions