Structure of pentacene/tetracene superlattices deposited on glass substrate

H. Akimichi, T. Inoshita, S. Hotta, H. Noge, and H. Sakaki

Citation: Applied Physics Letters 63, 3158 (1993); doi: 10.1063/1.110234
View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.110234
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/63/23?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing
Articles you may be interested in
Structure and magnetic properties of FePt(001) graded films deposited on glass substrates
J. Appl. Phys. 111, 07B715 (2012); 10.1063/1.3679382
Structural, optical, and photocatalytic properties of ZnO:Al nanowall structure deposited on glass substrate
by spray pyrolysis
J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 27, 885 (2009); 10.1116/1.3093878
Ultrafast carrier dynamics in pentacene, functionalized pentacene, tetracene, and rubrene single crystals
Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 162101 (2006); 10.1063/1.2193801
Pentacene organic transistors and ring oscillators on glass and on flexible polymeric substrates
Appl. Phys. Lett. 82, 4175 (2003); 10.1063/1.1579870
Influence of substrate temperature and deposition rate on the structure of erbium films deposited on glass
and aC substrates
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 63, 1497 (1992); 10.1063/1.1143002

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
203.199.213.130 On: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:25:53

Structure of pentacenehetracene
on glass substrate

superlattices

deposited

H. AkimichLa) T. Inoshita, S. Hotta, H. Noge, and H. Sakakib)

Quantum Wave Project, Research Development Corporation of Japan, 4-3-24-302 Komaba, Meguro-ku,
Tokyo 153, Japan

(Received 6 July 1993; accepted for publication 4 October 1993)

Pentacene/tetracene organic superlattices were formed by deposition on a glass substrate, and
their structure was investigated by x-ray diffraction and photoluminescence. For samples in
which the number (n ) of constituent pentacene (or tetracene) molecular layers within a period
is such that n>3, the first-order x-ray diffraction peak was found to consist of several equally
spaced subpeaks. Comparison of the spectra with calculated structure factors established that a
well-defined superlattice structure was achieved in these samples. In contrast, samples with n < 3
showed no evidence of superlattice formation. Photoluminescence spectra show clear correlation
with the x-ray results.
Inorganic semiconductor heterostructures and superlattices ( SLs) have been a subject of intense study for over
a decade due to their fascinating electronic and optical
properties. However, epitaxial growth of inorganic semiconductors is limited to materials with small lattice mismatch.* Organic materials, in contrast, are bound by the
weak van der Waals force,3 which allows for the layering of
materials of widely differing lattice constants without creating lattice defects. In principle, therefore, it is possible to
grow defect-free heterostructures with a wide range of materials. This partly explains the recent upsurge of interest
in organic layered structures.45
Another reason for this growing interest is the fact that
electronic processes in organic semiconductors are fundamentally different from those in conventional inorganic
materials,3 giving them unique electronic and optical properties. And the possibility of tailoring these properties
through layering is quite intriguing. Further investigation
into the linear as well as nonlinear optical properties of
organic layered structures may lead to new device applications.
The present letter reports on the formation of
tetracene/pentacene SLs by ultrahigh vacuum deposition
and their structural characterization using x-ray diffraction
and photoluminescence.
Our samples were prepared by deposition on a glass
substrate at room temperature using two hot wall evaporators6 in an ultrahigh vacuum chamber. This chamber
was pumped down to a base pressure of about 3 x low7 Pa
by a turbumolecular pump. The hot wall evaporators are
made of fused quartz and consist of a source cell and a hot
wall cell. The temperatures of these cells were controlled
separately by using tungsten heaters. The source materials
(pentacene or tetracene) were placed in the source cells,
and the hot wall cells heated to 120-140 C to allow the
vaporized molecules to be directed to the substrate. The
glass substrate (20 mm X 20 mm X 1 mm in size) was dePresent address: Vacuum Science Laboratory, ULVAC Corp., 2500
Hagisono, Chigasaki, Kanagawa 253, Japan.
Also at Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Tokyo 4-6-l Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153, Japan.

greased by acetone and set on a holder mounted on a turntable, which was rotated so that the substrate would face
the two evaporators alternatively. Prior to the sample
placement in front of the evaporators, the deposition rate
was monitored by a quartz oscillator attached to the turntable. The typical deposition rate was 0.16 rim/s for tetracene (source temperature= 120 C) and 0.02 rim/s for
pentacene ( 140 C). Throughout the deposition, the temperatures of the cells were kept constant.
Let us hereafter designate the structure of the samples
by P(n)/T( n) XN, where n (n) denotes the number of
pentacene (tetracene) molecular layers within a period and
N is the number of periods. We arbitrarily set n = n, and
various samples with 14>n>0.7 were prepared. To ease
comparison between samples, the total number of molecular layers (2nN) was chosen to be nearly constant. For
reference purposes, we also made two bulk samples consisting of a single thick layer of pentacene (thickness
d=320 nm) and tetracene (d=430 nm), respectively.
X-ray diffraction measurements were carried out at
room temperature using an x-ray diffractometer (Rigaku
RAD-B) operated with Cu Ka radiation. Figure 1 shows
the diffraction patterns of the reference samples, both of
which clearly display the first-order peak (at 26= 5.7 and
7.14 for pentacene and tetracene, respectively) as well as
higher-order peaks. The sharpness of these peaks indicates
the highly ordered structure of these samples. The interplanar spacing obtained from the peak positions are 1.54
and 1.21 nm for pentacene and tetracene, respectively. We
assumed that these spacings remain unchanged in SL and
estimated the n and n of each SL sample from the experimental growth rate and the growth time.
Diffraction patterns for various SL samples are presented in Fig. 2. Compared to bulk samples, the peaks are
broadened and higher-order structures (28> 10) are
weaker, reflecting increased disorder. A salient feature is
the splitting of the first-order peak for n>3 with larger
splitting for larger n. P(3)/T(3)
X 50, for instance, displays two subpeaks (28=6.46 and 6.78), whereas four
subpeaks are seen in P(7)/T(7)
x20 (at 28=5.86, 6.22,
6.7, and 7.14, respectively). Note the nearly equal subpeak spacing (~0.4) for the latter. As for P( 14)/T( 14)

3158 is copyrighted
Appl. Phys.
63 (23),
6 December
1993of AIP
0003-6951/93/63(23)/3158/3/$6.00
@ 1993 American Institute of Physics Downloaded
This article
as Lett.
indicated
in the
article. Reuse
content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions.
to IP:
3158
203.199.213.130 On: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:25:53

z
.t:

(a) pcntacene

11

(a)

-z
.s
1
d
2
5
2
2
E

P( 14)/T( 14)x10

L
2e (degree)

28 (dcgrce)
FIG. 1. X-ray diffraction patterns at room temperature for the bulk
(a) pentacene and (b) tetracene samples deposited on glass used for
reference.

X 10, it apparently has only two peaks but a deconvolution

analysis reveals four additional subpeaks. These six peaks
are roughly equal spaced with the average spacing ~0.2,
which is half the value for P( 7)/T( 7) X 20. This is a clear
indication that SLs with n)3 have a well-defined superlattice structure.

28 (degree)
FIG. 2. X-ray diffraction patterns of pentacene/tetracene SL samples at
room temperature.

28 (degree)
FIG. 3. Calculated structure factors for (a) P( 14)/T(
P(7)/T(7)
x20.

14) X 10 and (b)

To make our discussion more quantitative, the structure factors S(e) of these SLs were calculated and compared with the diffraction patterns. In the calculation (1)
we took into account carbon atoms only, (2) each pentacene or tetracene layer was assumed to be a perfect crystal
with its atomic arrangement identical to that of the u-b
molecular plane reported in the literature,7 and (3) the
interlayer spacings were set equal to the experimental values obtained above.
Figure 3 presents the calculated results. Overall agreement between the calculation and the experiment is good.
(It should be noted that our calculation does not take into
account atomic form factors. Their inclusion would suppress higher-order peaks, bringing the calculation closer to
the experiment.) The S( 0) for P( 14)/T( 14) x 10 exhibits
two main first-order (28 < 8) peaks (at 8 equal to the bulk
pentacene and tetracene values) plus subpeaks resulting
from the superlattice period, in agreement with the experiment. For P(7)/T(7)
X20, the superlattice period modulates S( 0) more strongly and, therefore, the simple classification of the peaks into bulklike main peaks and SL
subpeaks is not very meaningful, again consistent with the
experiment. A closer inspection, however, reveals that the
calculated S( 0) almost vanishes at 28==6 (halfway between the two bulk values) but the diffraction pattern does
not. This discrepancy may be explained by structural disorder. The S(0) generally relies on the subtle interplay
between the two bulk periods and the SL period. Thus
S( f3) would be particularly sensitive to disorder if 8 is at
the middle of the two bulk peaks where all the three periods are equally important. The calculated peak spacings

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions.
Akimichi et al.Downloaded
3159 to IP:
3159
Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 63, No. 23, 6 December 1993
203.199.213.130 On: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:25:53

500

GO0

700

800

900

Wavelength (nm)
FIG. 4. Photoluminescence spectra of pentacene/tetracene SL as well as
reference pentacene and tetracene samples taken at 77 K.

are 0.44 and 0.22 for P(7)/T(7)

x20 and P( 14)/T( 14)
X 10, respectively, and are in close agreement with the
experiment.
The situation is remarkably different for n < 3: the diffraction patterns (Fig. 2) display only two main peaks
located at 20= 6.12 (first order) and 12.18 (second order)
without any fine structure. The interplanar spacing obtained is 1.44 nm and is roughly equal to the average of
bulk pentacene and tetracene values. From this, we deduce
that for n < 3, pentacene and tetracene molecules are
strongly intermixed to form a virtual-crystal alloy.

Photoluminescence (PL) measurements of the samples are also performed at 77 K, using a chopped Ar+ laser
beam at wavelength 514.5 nm. At this wavelength, absorption occurs predominantly in tetracene since pentacene is
nearly transparent in this regime. Figure 4 presents the
obtained spectra for various n. One immediately sees that
there is an abrupt change in spectrum at n = 3: For n>3 the
spectrum is essentially that of tetracene, whereas for n < 3
radiative recombination takes place in pentacene (meaning
that the initial excitation in tetracene is transferred to pentacene where radiative recombination took place). That
PL and x-ray diffraction exhibit a crossover behavior at
exactly the same n value is a strong indication that they
have the same structural origin. This seems quite likely,
since energy transfer between scenes is mainly through
dipoledipole
interaction, which is orders of magnitude
stronger within a layer than between layers,* and should be
strongly dependent on whether pentacene and tetracene
molecules are found in the same layer (intermixing).
In conclusion, a combined x-ray diffraction and PL
study was conducted on pentacene/tetracene SLs deposited on a glass substrate. The result shows that a welldefined SL structure is achieved for n>3, whereas the samples with n < 3 exhibit no SL period, indicating the
complete intermixing of pentacene and tetracene.
The authors would like to thank Dr. M. KuwataGonokami, Dr. T. Matsusue, and Dr. K. Uchiyama for
many useful discussions.

R. Dingle, ed., Semiconductors and Semimetals (Academic, New York,

1987), Vol. 24.
2J. W. Matthews and A. E. Blakeslee, J. Cryst. Growth 27, 118 ( 1974).
M. Pope and C. E. Swenberg, Electronic Processes in Organic Crystals
(Oxford U. P., New York, 1982).
4F. F. So and S. R. Forrest, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2649 (1991).
T. Yoshimura, S. Tatsuura, and W. Sotoyama, Appl. Phys. Lett. 59,482
(1991).
6T. Akiyama, Y. Nakano, Y. Tanijiri, H. Kazawa, and H. Fujiyasu,
Chem. Eng. Sci. 45, 1049 ( 1990).
E. A. Silinsh, Organic Molecular Crystals (Springer, Berlin, 1980).
M. R. Philpott, J. Chem. Phys. 58, 588 (1973).

Appl. Phys. asLett.,

Vol. 63,
No. article.
23, 6 December
1993content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions.
Akimichi et a/. Downloaded
3160
This 3160
article is copyrighted
indicated
in the
Reuse of AIP
to IP:
203.199.213.130 On: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:25:53