[Pw_forum] workfunction and efield
Stefano Baroni
baroni at sissa.it
Wed Sep 16 15:41:33 CEST 2009
On Sep 16, 2009, at 3:17 PM, 程迎春 wrote:
> Thank you for your reply.
> Recently I have read a paper published in Nano letters titled
> "Tuning the Graphene work function by electric field effect"(http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/nl901572a
> ). The main conclusion is that the work function of graphene can be
> adjusted as the gate voltage tunes the Fermi level across the charge
> neutrality point. The tunable work function makes graphene an
> attractive material for low contact barrier electrodes. Motivated
> by this attractive application, I tried to calculate the work
> function under external electric field.
>
> Before the calculation, I firstly tried to understand the definition
> of the work function and how it is calculated in Pwscf package. The
> literature (J. Phys.: condens. Matter 11(1999) 2689-2696) mentioned
> in the description of the workFct_example directory shows the
> macroscopic-average method to the calculation of work functions.
> The work function is the minimum energy required to extract one
> electron to an infinite distance form the surface
which equals plus or minus infinity, in the presence of an applied
electric field ...
> and its value is equivalent to the mean electrostatic potential
> energy across the metal surface minus the Fermi energy.
Efermi - average potential far from the surgace
the average potential far from the surface does not approach a
constant in the presence of an electric field, so you have to
understand exactly what the experimentalists measure,
when you are done, I would be pleased to learn that ...
> And thus the question whether electric field can reflect the Fermi
> level of a certain material surface arises.
the above statement is beyond my understanding capabilities ...
>
> The example31 shows how to perform electronic structure calculations
> using pwscf package for a system undergoing the presence of a static
> homogeneous finite electric field. As a test, I firstly calculated
> the work function of graphene at zero external electric field and
> the calculated value is consistent with the previous published
> paper(PRL_94_236602) and the experimental result. Secondly, I
> calculated the work function at finit external electric field, and
> then I use the pp.x and average.x to get the work function as at the
> zero external efield. It seems that the calculated work function
> value is different from that under zero external efield. But I
> don't know whether the calculated work function value is reasonable.
>
> My questions are as follows:
> 1) Whether the work function would be changed under a finite
> external efield?
this question does not have an answer until one understand what is
meant by "work function in a finite field" (the usual definition does
not apply)
> 2) Can I use the method calculating work function under zero efield
> to calculate work function under finite efield?
NO, because of the above: the electrostatic potential does not tend to
a cosnatant far from the surface
> 3) Can the plot number 11 in pp.x package deal with the potential
> under finite efield?
no idea whatsoever
SB
---
Stefano Baroni - SISSA & DEMOCRITOS National Simulation Center -
Trieste
http://stefano.baroni.me [+39] 040 3787 406 (tel) -528 (fax) /
stefanobaroni (skype)
La morale est une logique de l'action comme la logique est une morale
de la pensée - Jean Piaget
Please, if possible, don't send me MS Word or PowerPoint attachments
Why? See: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20090916/39255da2/attachment.htm
More information about the Pw_forum
mailing list