0
Research Papers

Mixed-Mode Interactions Between Graphene and Substrates by Blister Tests

[+] Author and Article Information
Zhiyi Cao, Rui Huang, Kenneth M. Liechti

Department of Aerospace Engineering and
Engineering Mechanics,
Research Center for the Mechanics of Solids,
Structures and Materials,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712

Li Tao, Deji Akinwande

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Applied Mechanics Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF APPLIED MECHANICS. Manuscript received April 1, 2015; final manuscript received May 7, 2015; published online June 9, 2015. Editor: Yonggang Huang.

J. Appl. Mech 82(8), 081008 (Aug 01, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: JAM-15-1176; doi: 10.1115/1.4030591 History: Received April 01, 2015; Revised May 07, 2015; Online June 09, 2015

Many of the attractive properties of graphene will only be realized when it can be mass produced. One bottleneck is the efficient transfer of graphene between various substrates in nanomanufacturing processes such as roll-to-roll and transfer printing. In such processes, it is important to understand how the ratio of shear-to-tension at the interface between graphene and substrates affects the adhesion energy. With this in mind, this paper examines the mixed-mode adhesive interactions between chemical vapor deposition (CVD) grown graphene that had been transferred to copper or silicon substrates. The approach that was taken was to use blister tests with a range of graphene backing layer materials and thicknesses in order to provide a wide range of the shear-to-tension ratio or fracture mode-mix at the interface. Raman spectroscopy was used to ensure that graphene had indeed been delaminated from each substrate. Measurements of pressure, top surface deflection, and blister diameter were coupled with fracture mechanics analyses to obtain the delamination resistance curves and steady state adhesion energy of each interface. The results showed that the adhesive interactions between graphene and both substrates (Cu and Si) had a strong dependence on the fracture mode-mix. In the absence of plasticity effects, the most likely explanation of this effect is asperity locking from the inherent surface roughness of the substrates.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The geometry and boundary conditions that were used in the finite element model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

An interferogram of a graphene/PDMS/photoresist blister on copper at 45.4 kPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the blister test apparatus

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of the surface deflection profiles between experiment and finite element simulations using different moduli for PDMS and photoresist. The pressure was 76.2 kPa and the crack length a = 285 μm. (a) Varying EPR when EPDMS = 0.8 MPa and (b) varying EPDMS when EPR = 3.4 GPa.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Normalized energy release rate of an interfacial delamination as a function of the normalized crack length

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Fracture mode-mix versus normalized crack length for blister tests with PDMS; (b) the phase angle of mode-mix for blister tests with bare photoresist; (c) effect of Young's modulus of PDMS on mode-mix; and (d) dependence of the mode-mix on the layer thickness ratio for blister tests with PDMS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Distributions of the shear stress straight ahead of the crack front for blister tests with (a) a PDMS/photoresist film and (b) a bare photoresist film. The insets show the shear stress distribution pattern near the crack front.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Resistance curves for (a) graphene/copper, (b) PDMS/copper, (c) graphene/silicon, and (d) PDMS/silicon interfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Toughness envelopes of (a) graphene/copper, (b) graphene/silicon, (c) PDMS/copper, and (d) PDMS/silicon interfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Raman spectra of (a) PDMS and graphene on PDMS/photoresist membranes after blister testing from the (b) copper/graphene interface and (c) from silicon/graphene interface. (d) Raman mapping on a membrane that had delaminated from a copper substrate.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In