OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Andrew M. Weiner
  • Vol. 22, Iss. 16 — Aug. 11, 2014
  • pp: 19375–19385
« Show journal navigation

Tuning the nonlinear optical absorption of reduced graphene oxide by chemical reduction

Hongfei Shi, Can Wang, Zhipei Sun, Yueliang Zhou, Kuijuan Jin, Simon A. T. Redfern, and Guozhen Yang  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 22, Issue 16, pp. 19375-19385 (2014)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.22.019375


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1497 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Reduced graphene oxides with varying degrees of reduction have been produced by hydrazine reduction of graphene oxide. The linear and nonlinear optical properties of both graphene oxide as well as the reduced graphene oxides have been measured by single beam Z-scan measurement in the picosecond region. The results reveal both saturable absorption and two-photon absorption, strongly dependent on the intensity of the pump pulse: saturable absorption occurs at lower pump pulse intensity (~1.5 GW/cm2 saturation intensity) whereas two-photon absorption dominates at higher intensities (≥5.7 GW/cm2). Intriguingly, we find that the two-photon absorption coefficient (from 1.5 cm/GW to 4.5cm/GW) and the saturation intensity (from 1 GW/cm2 to 2 GW/cm2) vary with chemical reduction, which is ascribed to the varying concentrations of sp2 domains and sp2 clusters in the reduced graphene oxides. Our results not only provide an insight into the evolution of the nonlinear optical coefficient in reduced graphene oxide, but also suggest that chemical engineering techniques may usefully be applied to tune the nonlinear optical properties of various nano-materials, including atomically thick graphene sheets.

© 2014 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

Graphene has attracted widespread interest due to its unique linear and nonlinear optical properties [1

1. F. Bonaccorso, Z. Sun, T. Hasan, and A. C. Ferrari, “Graphene photonics and optoelectronics,” Nat. Photonics 4(9), 611–622 (2010). [CrossRef]

]. Broadband universal absorption [2

2. R. R. Nair, P. Blake, A. N. Grigorenko, K. S. Novoselov, T. J. Booth, T. Stauber, N. M. R. Peres, and A. K. Geim, “Fine structure constant defines visual transparency of graphene,” Science 320(5881), 1308 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,3

3. K. F. Mak, M. Y. Sfeir, Y. Wu, C. H. Lui, J. A. Misewich, and T. F. Heinz, “Measurement of the optical conductivity of graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 101(19), 196405 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], ultrafast carrier dynamics [4

4. M. Breusing, C. Ropers, and T. Elsaesser, “Ultrafast carrier dynamics in graphite,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(8), 086809 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and band-filling effects [5

5. Z. P. Sun, T. Hasan, F. Torrisi, D. Popa, G. Privitera, F. Q. Wang, F. Bonaccorso, D. M. Basko, and A. C. Ferrari, “Graphene mode-locked ultrafast laser,” ACS Nano 4(2), 803–810 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,6

6. Z. P. Sun, D. Popa, T. Hasan, F. Torrisi, F. Q. Wang, E. J. R. Kelleher, J. C. Travers, V. Nicolosi, and A. C. Ferrari, “A stable, wideband tunable, near transform-limited, graphene-mode-locked, ultrafast laser,” Nano Res. 3(9), 653–660 (2010). [CrossRef]

] make it a promising broadband fast-saturable absorber for various applications, including ultrafast lasers [7

7. T. Hasan, Z. P. Sun, F. Q. Wang, F. Bonaccorso, P. H. Tan, A. G. Rozhin, and A. C. Ferrari, “Nanotube-polymer composites for ultrafast photonics,” Adv. Mater. 21(38–39), 3874–3899 (2009). [CrossRef]

9

9. Z. Sun, T. Hasan, and A. C. Ferrari, “Ultrafast lasers mode-locked by nanotubes and graphene,” Physica E 44(6), 1082–1091 (2012). [CrossRef]

]. The high nonlinear susceptibility of graphene can also potentially enable high-efficiency optical frequency conversion (e.g., four wave mixing [10

10. E. Hendry, P. J. Hale, J. Moger, A. K. Savchenko, and S. A. Mikhailov, “Coherent nonlinear optical response of graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105(9), 097401 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], harmonic generation [11

11. A. Y. Bykov, T. V. Murzina, M. G. Rybin, and E. D. Obraztsova, “Second harmonic generation in multilayer graphene induced by direct electric current,” Phys. Rev. B 85(12), 121413 (2012). [CrossRef]

,12

12. J. J. Dean and H. M. van Driel, “Graphene and few-layer graphite probed by second-harmonic generation: Theory and experiment,” Phys. Rev. B 82(12), 125411 (2010). [CrossRef]

] and nonlinear refraction [13

13. H. Zhang, S. Virally, Q. L. Bao, L. K. Ping, S. Massar, N. Godbout, and P. Kockaert, “Z-scan measurement of the nonlinear refractive index of graphene,” Opt. Lett. 37(11), 1856–1858 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,14

14. X. L. Zhang, Z. B. Liu, X. C. Li, Q. Ma, X. D. Chen, J. G. Tian, Y. F. Xu, and Y. S. Chen, “Transient thermal effect, nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption properties of graphene oxide sheets in dispersion,” Opt. Express 21(6), 7511–7520 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]).

2. Sample preparation and characterization methods

The RGO samples were fabricated by hydrazine reduction following the process described previously [28

28. S. Park, J. H. An, I. W. Jung, R. D. Piner, S. J. An, X. S. Li, A. Velamakanni, and R. S. Ruoff, “Colloidal suspensions of highly reduced graphene oxide in a wide variety of organic solvents,” Nano Lett. 9(4), 1593–1597 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. In summary, 3 mg GO powder (produced by a modified Hummers method [29

29. F. Bonaccorso, A. Lombardo, T. Hasan, Z. P. Sun, L. Colombo, and A. C. Ferrari, “Production and processing of graphene and 2d crystals,” Mater. Today 15(12), 564–589 (2012). [CrossRef]

,30

30. F. Bonaccorso and Z. P. Sun, “Solution processing of graphene, topological insulators and other 2d crystals for ultrafast photonics,” Opt. Mater. Express 4(1), 63–78 (2014). [CrossRef]

]) was dispersed in 1 mL deionized water with 40 minutes of sonication. The suspension was diluted by adding 9 mL N,N-Dimethylformamide (DMF) and centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 5 minutes (Anke TDL-60B) to remove any relatively large particles. Hydrazine hydrate was used to reduce GO. After adding hydrazine hydrate, the light-brown suspension was stirred in a water bath at 80 °C for 12 hours. The suspensions with hydrazine turned into black upon reduction, and the concentration of the obtained RGO dispersion was controlled at around 0.3 mg/ml. The degree of reduction, corresponding to the residual number of oxygen-containing groups in RGO, was controlled by adjusting the dose of hydrazine hydrate. Four samples, reduced with 0 μl, 0.45 μl, 1 μl, and 4 μl hydrazine (noted as GO, RGO0.45, RGO1, RGO4 respectively in the following parts of this paper), were used for this investigation. The dispersion samples are illustrated in Fig. 1, and remain uniform, in a stable colloidal state, for months.
Fig. 1 The GO and RGO dispersions used in this study.

The as-synthesized dispersion samples were characterized by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, ESCALAB 250), UV-vis spectroscopy (SpectraPro-500i) and Raman spectroscopy (JY-T64000) to determine their fundamental physical and chemical properties. For XPS and Raman measurements, the dispersion samples were drop-cast onto Si3N4/Si substrates and dried at 50 °C in a vacuum oven. In addition, samples were spray-coated onto quartz substrates pre-heated to 50 °C and subsequently dried at 50 °C in a vacuum oven prior to measuring UV-vis spectroscopy. A similar quantity of sample (~2 ml) was used in each case to get similar film thicknesses for comparative purposes. The single beam Z-scan method was employed to measure the optical nonlinearity of the dispersion samples, using a 532 nm Nd: YAG laser with 25 ps (τ) pulse duration and 1 Hz repetition rate. The laser output was focused using an f = 200 mm lens, giving about ~2.5 mm Rayleigh length (z0) and ~20.6 μm beam waist (ω0). A range of dispersions (GO, RGO0.45, RGO1, and RGO4) were held within 1 mm thick quartz cells for nonlinear optical measurement. The cell is fixed perpendicular to the laser beam and moved along the optical axis on a linear displacement platform [31

31. M. Sheikbahae, A. A. Said, T. H. Wei, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Vanstryland, “Sensitive measurement of optical nonlinearities using a single beam,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 26(4), 760–769 (1990). [CrossRef]

]. The transmitted laser light was collected by a large-aperture lens (up to 40 mm) for accurate measurement. To calibrate this measurement setup, a standard CS2 liquid sample in an identical 1 mm quartz cell is also measured with a laser intensity of 2.7 GW/cm2. The Reχ3 of our CS2 sample in this configuration was −2.9 × 10−12 esu, comparable to that reported for CS2 [31

31. M. Sheikbahae, A. A. Said, T. H. Wei, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Vanstryland, “Sensitive measurement of optical nonlinearities using a single beam,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 26(4), 760–769 (1990). [CrossRef]

], validating the accuracy of our measurement setup and analysis methods.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. XPS, Raman and linear absorption

XPS spectra of GO and RGO samples are reported in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 XPS spectra of samples GO, RGO0.45, RGO1, and RGO4. Peaks are (1) C-C, (2)C-N, (3)C-OH, (4)C = O, (5)O = C-OH.
The C-C binding energy was assigned at around 284.7 eV. Chemical shifts of + 1.5, + 2.5, + 4.0 eV were used for functional groups C-OH, C = O, and O = C-OH respectively [32

32. S. Yumitori, “Correlation of c1s chemical state intensities with the o1s intensity in the xps analysis of anodically oxidized glass-like carbon samples,” J. Mater. Sci. 35(1), 139–146 (2000). [CrossRef]

]. In the RGO samples, a new sub-peak at 285.8 eV appears, corresponding to the C within the C-N bonds of hydrazones [33

33. R. J. Waltman, J. Pacansky, and C. W. Bates, “X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic studies on organic photoconductors evaluation of atomic charges on chlorodiane blue and p(diethylamino)benzaldehyde diphenylhydrazone,” Chem. Mater. 5(12), 1799–1804 (1993). [CrossRef]

]. XPS spectra have been fitted with sub-peaks corresponding to the functional groups. The percentage area of each sub-peak and the calculated C/O ratio for the four samples are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Characteristics of our four samples. The chemical bond and element composition have been obtained from XPS spectra. Oxygen-containing groups are partially removed while C-N bonds arise after reduction. The D/G band ratios (ID/IG) and π-π* absorption peak positions are measured from Raman and UV-vis absorption spectra respectively. The TPA coefficient (β) and saturation intensity (Is) obtained from Z-scan experiments are also listed.

table-icon
View This Table
As might be expected, oxygen containing groups in RGO are removed gradually, to an increasing degree as larger doses of hydrazine hydrate are used. The maximum C/O ratio of the RGO in this study is around 3.2. Note that increasing the dose of hydrazine to greater that 4 μL did not increase the C/O ratio further, indicating a moderate further influence on the reduction of GO at these levels.

3.2. Open aperture Z-scans

Results from open aperture Z-scan measurements of our RGO and GO dispersion samples are shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5 Open aperture Z-scan curves of GO and RGO samples measured at different pulse energy. The symbols represent experimental data and the solid lines are the results from our simulations.
All samples were measured at four input pulse energies: 0.4 μJ, 0.7 μJ, 1 μJ, and 1.3 μJ. For all samples SA is typically observed at lower pulse energy levels, while higher pump energy leads to TPA.

To better understand our Z-scan measurement results, we consider TPA and SA simultaneously [22

22. Z. B. Liu, Y. Wang, X. L. Zhang, Y. F. Xu, Y. S. Chen, and J. G. Tian, “Nonlinear optical properties of graphene oxide in nanosecond and picosecond regimes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(2), 021902 (2009). [CrossRef]

]. We use the beam propagation expression from Maxwell’s equations to describe the propagation of electrical field along the z-axis in the samples. Assuming cylindrical symmetry, the optical electrical field (E) can be expressed as [38

38. D. I. Kovsh, S. Yang, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Van Stryland, “Nonlinear optical beam propagation for optical limiting,” Appl. Opt. 38(24), 5168–5180 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]:
2jkEz=(2r2+1rr+k02χNL'(r,z))E
(1)
where
χNL'(r,z)=2n0Δn(r,z)jn0k0αΔn=n2Iα=α01+IIs+βI
(2)
and r and z are the space coordinates perpendicular and parallel to the beam propagation direction, respectively. The wave vector in vacuum is k0 and k is that in medium (k = n0*k0) where n0 is the refractive index of the medium. The intensity is I = 2n02c|E|2.

Equation (2) demonstrates that four fundamental parameters are typically needed to describe the samples’ nonlinear optical properties: the nonlinear refractive index n2, the linear absorbance α0, the saturation intensity Is, and the TPA coefficient β. We also carried out closed-aperture Z-scan measurements. The closed aperture Z-scan curves for all GO and RGO samples that we obtained are very close to that of pure DMF (not shown), which implies that GO or RGO in solution do not significantly contribute to the closed aperture Z-scan results. In other words, n2 for all our samples can be assumed to be approximately equal to that of the pure DMF, which is determined to be 8.54 × 10−19 m2/W from the closed aperture Z-scan experiment. The linear absorbance α0 was calculated from the sample transmittance measured at very low intensity (~0.027 GW/cm2) at 532 nm. It is well known that β is typically dependent on input pulse energy (i.e., the input pulse intensity) while the saturation intensity Is can be considered independent of the pump energy [22

22. Z. B. Liu, Y. Wang, X. L. Zhang, Y. F. Xu, Y. S. Chen, and J. G. Tian, “Nonlinear optical properties of graphene oxide in nanosecond and picosecond regimes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(2), 021902 (2009). [CrossRef]

]. Thus, the above equation can be numerically solved using the Crank-Nicholson finite difference method [38

38. D. I. Kovsh, S. Yang, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Van Stryland, “Nonlinear optical beam propagation for optical limiting,” Appl. Opt. 38(24), 5168–5180 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The simulation results are plotted in Fig. 5 and show a good match to both the SA and TPA behavior obtained from our experimental results (dots).

The nonlinear absorption coefficients obtained from our analysis are summarized in Fig. 6, and listed in Table 1.
Fig. 6 Linear absorbance, saturation intensiy, and TPA coefficents of the GO and RGO samples as a function of C/O ratio. Open triangles represent TPA coefficents measured at different pulse energy. The average of the data is given by the solid line as a guide to the eye.
Open triangles in Fig. 6 represent β calculated for different pump intensities. We find that β increases slightly as the input pulse energy increases. This implies that, in addition to TPA, excited state absorption from the TPA excited state may also contribute to the nonlinear absorption at higher intensity [14

14. X. L. Zhang, Z. B. Liu, X. C. Li, Q. Ma, X. D. Chen, J. G. Tian, Y. F. Xu, and Y. S. Chen, “Transient thermal effect, nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption properties of graphene oxide sheets in dispersion,” Opt. Express 21(6), 7511–7520 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. This type of excited state absorption, followed by TPA, is particularly attractive for optical limiting applications [39

39. R. L. Sutherland, Handbook of Nonlinear Optics (Marcel Dekker, 1996).

]. As shown in Table 1, the magnitude of Is and β of our GO are comparable to those previously reported on GO dispersions [14

14. X. L. Zhang, Z. B. Liu, X. C. Li, Q. Ma, X. D. Chen, J. G. Tian, Y. F. Xu, and Y. S. Chen, “Transient thermal effect, nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption properties of graphene oxide sheets in dispersion,” Opt. Express 21(6), 7511–7520 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,22

22. Z. B. Liu, Y. Wang, X. L. Zhang, Y. F. Xu, Y. S. Chen, and J. G. Tian, “Nonlinear optical properties of graphene oxide in nanosecond and picosecond regimes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(2), 021902 (2009). [CrossRef]

]. We also observe that the linear absorbance, saturation intensity and TPA coefficient all increase with reduction, clearly indicating the dependence of RGO nonlinearity on GO reduction. Our result gives a clear insight into the evolution of the nonlinear optical properties of graphene oxide materials with different amount of sp2 domain, as discussed below.

Our experimental results may be understood on the context of an amorphous structural model for GO and RGO [16

16. L. Z. Liu, L. Wang, J. F. Gao, J. J. Zhao, X. F. Gao, and Z. F. Chen, “Amorphous structural models for graphene oxides,” Carbon 50(4), 1690–1698 (2012). [CrossRef]

]. In this model, oxygen-containing groups tend to aggregate amorphously, forming a sp3 matrix in which isolated sp2 cluster islands (size ~5 nm) are buried (Fig. 7).
Fig. 7 Structure and band diagram of RGO. The left cartoon (a) illustrates the three regions present in RGO: sp3 matrix, sp2 cluster and sp2 domain. It should be noted that there are no sp2 domains in GO, but the sp3 matrix and sp2 clusters are almost identical to those in RGO. The right hand side (b) illustrates the band gap of the three regions in RGO (pink and blue represent conduction and valence band, respectively). For sp3 matrix and sp2 cluster, the band gap are about 6eV and 0.5eV, respectively. The band gap of sp2 domains varies from 6 eV to 0.5 eV, depending on their size. The photon energy used was 2.3 eV (532 nm). Single and TPA routes are illustrated by green arrows. Single photon absorption exists in sp2 clusters while two photon absorption exists in the sp3 matrix. Both single and TPA exist in sp2 domains.
The sp2 clusters are bunches of well-patterned aromatic rings formed in the oxidation process when originally producing GO from graphite. After reduction, the sp2 clusters typically do not change, but instead smaller conducting sp2 domains form and grow within the sp3 matrix [17

17. G. Eda, Y. Y. Lin, C. Mattevi, H. Yamaguchi, H. A. Chen, I. S. Chen, C. W. Chen, and M. Chhowalla, “Blue photoluminescence from chemically derived graphene oxide,” Adv. Mater. 22(4), 505–509 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The sp2 domains are irregular conjugate carbon bonds, smaller in size than the cluster islands, and produced during reduction. Different regions in the RGO develop different electronic energy structures: the sp3 matrix typically has an σ-σ* band gap of ~6 eV [40

40. J. Robertson and E. P. O’Reilly, “Electronic and atomic structure of amorphous carbon,” Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter 35(6), 2946–2957 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]; the sp2 clusters normally have a semiconductor band structure with a band gap of ~0.5 eV [17

17. G. Eda, Y. Y. Lin, C. Mattevi, H. Yamaguchi, H. A. Chen, I. S. Chen, C. W. Chen, and M. Chhowalla, “Blue photoluminescence from chemically derived graphene oxide,” Adv. Mater. 22(4), 505–509 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]; while the sp2 domains’ energy (typically from 0.5 to 6 eV) structures depend on their size [17

17. G. Eda, Y. Y. Lin, C. Mattevi, H. Yamaguchi, H. A. Chen, I. S. Chen, C. W. Chen, and M. Chhowalla, “Blue photoluminescence from chemically derived graphene oxide,” Adv. Mater. 22(4), 505–509 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The band diagram of these various components of RGO is illustrated in Fig. 7. The photo energy we used (2.26 eV) is well below the sp3 matrix band gap, but above the sp2 cluster band gap. The photon energy is likely comparable to the band gap of sp2 domains. It follows that TPA will mainly arise within the sp3 matrix, while SA is associated with the sp2 clusters. Both TPA and SA may be present in the sp2 domains. Expression for the optical absorption of GO and RGO are, therefore [22

22. Z. B. Liu, Y. Wang, X. L. Zhang, Y. F. Xu, Y. S. Chen, and J. G. Tian, “Nonlinear optical properties of graphene oxide in nanosecond and picosecond regimes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(2), 021902 (2009). [CrossRef]

,39

39. R. L. Sutherland, Handbook of Nonlinear Optics (Marcel Dekker, 1996).

]:
αGO(I)=Ncσc01+IIsc+NmσmTPAI=α0GO1+IIsGO+βGOIαRGO(I)=Ncσc01+IIsc+fNmσd01+IIsd+(1f)NmσmTPAI+fNmσdTPAI=α0RGO1+IIsRGO+βRGOI
(3)
We denote the number density of carbon sites in GO’s sp2 clusters (sp3 matrix) as Nc (Nm) and Nc + Nm corresponds to the total carbon atomic number density. In RGO, the fraction of carbon sites that are converted from the sp3 matrix to sp2 domains is f. In the expression for the optical absorption of RGO, the first and second terms represent the SA originating from the sp2 clusters and sp2 domains respectively. The linear optical absorption cross section and saturation intensity of sp2 clusters (with the equivalent values for domains in parentheses) are σc0 (σd0) and Isc (Isd). These terms may be combined into an effective SA term in which α0RGO and IsRGO are the effective linear absorbance and saturation intensity. Similarly, the TPA cross section, representing contributions from sp3 matrix (σmTPA) and sp2 domain (σdTPA), may be expressed in terms of a single effective TPA coefficient (βRGO). Larger values of f correspond to increased reduction. Here, we compare the RGO samples (RGO0.45, RGO1, RGO4) with GO to obtain a qualitative comparison of the nonlinear optical properties of sp2 domains, sp2 clusters and the sp3 matrix.

Detailed information about the nonlinear optical properties of these three regions can be derived from Eq. (3) and our experiment results. We consider the TPA first on account of its relative simplicity. For RGO, βRGO = (1-f) Nm σmTPA + f Nm σdTPA> βGO = Nm σmTPA, which implies that σdTPA> σmTPA. A carbon site in a sp2 domain has a larger TPA coefficient than one in the sp3 matrix. The analysis of SA is more complex. For simplicity, we assume that I<<Isc, Isd, IsGO, IsRGO and that the terms of SA in Eq. (3) can be rewritten as:

Ncσc0(1+IIsc)=α0GO(1+IIsGO)Ncσc0(1+IIsc)+fNmσd0(1+IIsd)=α0RGO(1+IIsRGO)(4)Hence, the linear absorbance and saturation intensities of different regions are:
α0GO=Ncσc0IsGO=Iscα0RGO=Ncσc0+fNmσd0Ncσc0(1Isc1IsRGO)=fNmσd0(1IsRGO1Isd)
(5)
It can be seen that α0RGO increases with f, or the reduction degree, which explains the observed increase of linear absorbance with reduction. Since IsRGO>IsGO, both sides of the final equation are positive, thus Isd>IsRGO>IsGO = Isc. The saturation intensity of sp2 domains is larger than that of the sp2 clusters. The sp2 domains generated in GO during chemical reduction to RGO thus show both larger saturation intensities and larger TPA cross section.

The TPA in GO and RGO can be dominated by excited state absorption, potentially making GO and RGO good optical limiter materials. In an RGO-based optical limiter, before the pump intensity reaches the level for TPA, the SA effect may relax more energy leading to better transparency, which is somewhat unexpected. If the saturation intensity is pushed beyond the threshold of TPA, then SA will no longer influence the optical limiting process. We also estimate that sp2 domains have higher Is than that of the sp2 clusters, as well as larger TPA cross sections. This implies that producing more sp2 domains in the samples will favor optical limiting effects and suppress saturation absorption at low working intensities. It is also worth noting that the contribution of sp2 domains to both SA and TPA is size-dependent. This suggests that a better saturable absorber or optical limiter can be obtained by tuning the size of sp2 domains in RGO through chemical engineering.

4. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the National Key Basic Research Program of China (Grant No. 2013CBA01703), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11174355), Teknologiateollisuus TT-100, the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (REA grant agreement No. 631610), and Aalto University (Finland).

Reference and links

1.

F. Bonaccorso, Z. Sun, T. Hasan, and A. C. Ferrari, “Graphene photonics and optoelectronics,” Nat. Photonics 4(9), 611–622 (2010). [CrossRef]

2.

R. R. Nair, P. Blake, A. N. Grigorenko, K. S. Novoselov, T. J. Booth, T. Stauber, N. M. R. Peres, and A. K. Geim, “Fine structure constant defines visual transparency of graphene,” Science 320(5881), 1308 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

K. F. Mak, M. Y. Sfeir, Y. Wu, C. H. Lui, J. A. Misewich, and T. F. Heinz, “Measurement of the optical conductivity of graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 101(19), 196405 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

M. Breusing, C. Ropers, and T. Elsaesser, “Ultrafast carrier dynamics in graphite,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(8), 086809 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

Z. P. Sun, T. Hasan, F. Torrisi, D. Popa, G. Privitera, F. Q. Wang, F. Bonaccorso, D. M. Basko, and A. C. Ferrari, “Graphene mode-locked ultrafast laser,” ACS Nano 4(2), 803–810 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

Z. P. Sun, D. Popa, T. Hasan, F. Torrisi, F. Q. Wang, E. J. R. Kelleher, J. C. Travers, V. Nicolosi, and A. C. Ferrari, “A stable, wideband tunable, near transform-limited, graphene-mode-locked, ultrafast laser,” Nano Res. 3(9), 653–660 (2010). [CrossRef]

7.

T. Hasan, Z. P. Sun, F. Q. Wang, F. Bonaccorso, P. H. Tan, A. G. Rozhin, and A. C. Ferrari, “Nanotube-polymer composites for ultrafast photonics,” Adv. Mater. 21(38–39), 3874–3899 (2009). [CrossRef]

8.

A. Martinez and Z. P. Sun, “Nanotube and graphene saturable absorbers for fibre lasers,” Nat. Photonics 7(11), 842–845 (2013). [CrossRef]

9.

Z. Sun, T. Hasan, and A. C. Ferrari, “Ultrafast lasers mode-locked by nanotubes and graphene,” Physica E 44(6), 1082–1091 (2012). [CrossRef]

10.

E. Hendry, P. J. Hale, J. Moger, A. K. Savchenko, and S. A. Mikhailov, “Coherent nonlinear optical response of graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105(9), 097401 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11.

A. Y. Bykov, T. V. Murzina, M. G. Rybin, and E. D. Obraztsova, “Second harmonic generation in multilayer graphene induced by direct electric current,” Phys. Rev. B 85(12), 121413 (2012). [CrossRef]

12.

J. J. Dean and H. M. van Driel, “Graphene and few-layer graphite probed by second-harmonic generation: Theory and experiment,” Phys. Rev. B 82(12), 125411 (2010). [CrossRef]

13.

H. Zhang, S. Virally, Q. L. Bao, L. K. Ping, S. Massar, N. Godbout, and P. Kockaert, “Z-scan measurement of the nonlinear refractive index of graphene,” Opt. Lett. 37(11), 1856–1858 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14.

X. L. Zhang, Z. B. Liu, X. C. Li, Q. Ma, X. D. Chen, J. G. Tian, Y. F. Xu, and Y. S. Chen, “Transient thermal effect, nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption properties of graphene oxide sheets in dispersion,” Opt. Express 21(6), 7511–7520 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

H. X. Chang, Z. H. Sun, Q. H. Yuan, F. Ding, X. M. Tao, F. Yan, and Z. J. Zheng, “Thin film field-effect phototransistors from bandgap-tunable, solution-processed, few-layer reduced graphene oxide films,” Adv. Mater. 22(43), 4872–4876 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

L. Z. Liu, L. Wang, J. F. Gao, J. J. Zhao, X. F. Gao, and Z. F. Chen, “Amorphous structural models for graphene oxides,” Carbon 50(4), 1690–1698 (2012). [CrossRef]

17.

G. Eda, Y. Y. Lin, C. Mattevi, H. Yamaguchi, H. A. Chen, I. S. Chen, C. W. Chen, and M. Chhowalla, “Blue photoluminescence from chemically derived graphene oxide,” Adv. Mater. 22(4), 505–509 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

S. Y. Zhou, G. H. Gweon, A. V. Fedorov, P. N. First, W. A. de Heer, D. H. Lee, F. Guinea, A. H. Castro Neto, and A. Lanzara, “Substrate-induced bandgap opening in epitaxial graphene,” Nat. Mater. 6(10), 770–775 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19.

Y. B. Zhang, T. T. Tang, C. Girit, Z. Hao, M. C. Martin, A. Zettl, M. F. Crommie, Y. R. Shen, and F. Wang, “Direct observation of a widely tunable bandgap in bilayer graphene,” Nature 459(7248), 820–823 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20.

S. F. Pei and H. M. Cheng, “The reduction of graphene oxide,” Carbon 50(9), 3210–3228 (2012). [CrossRef]

21.

K. P. Loh, Q. Bao, G. Eda, and M. Chhowalla, “Graphene oxide as a chemically tunable platform for optical applications,” Nat. Chem. 2(12), 1015–1024 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22.

Z. B. Liu, Y. Wang, X. L. Zhang, Y. F. Xu, Y. S. Chen, and J. G. Tian, “Nonlinear optical properties of graphene oxide in nanosecond and picosecond regimes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(2), 021902 (2009). [CrossRef]

23.

X. L. Zhang, X. Zhao, Z. B. Liu, S. Shi, W. Y. Zhou, J. G. Tian, Y. F. Xu, and Y. S. Chen, “Nonlinear optical and optical limiting properties of graphene oxide-fe3o4 hybrid material,” J. Opt. 13(7), 075202 (2011). [CrossRef]

24.

C. Gómez-Navarro, R. T. Weitz, A. M. Bittner, M. Scolari, A. Mews, M. Burghard, and K. Kern, “Electronic transport properties of individual chemically reduced graphene oxide sheets,” Nano Lett. 7(11), 3499–3503 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25.

T. Remyamol, H. John, and P. Gopinath, “Synthesis and nonlinear optical properties of reduced graphene oxide covalently functionalized with polyaniline,” Carbon 59, 308–314 (2013). [CrossRef]

26.

X. F. Jiang, L. Polavarapu, S. T. Neo, T. Venkatesan, and Q. H. Xu, “Graphene oxides as tunable broadband nonlinear optical materials for femtosecond laser pulses,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 3(6), 785–790 (2012). [CrossRef]

27.

Z.-B. Liu, X. Zhao, X.-L. Zhang, X.-Q. Yan, Y.-P. Wu, Y.-S. Chen, and J.-G. Tian, “Ultrafast dynamics and nonlinear optical responses from sp2- and sp3-hybridized domains in graphene oxide,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2(16), 1972–1977 (2011). [CrossRef]

28.

S. Park, J. H. An, I. W. Jung, R. D. Piner, S. J. An, X. S. Li, A. Velamakanni, and R. S. Ruoff, “Colloidal suspensions of highly reduced graphene oxide in a wide variety of organic solvents,” Nano Lett. 9(4), 1593–1597 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

29.

F. Bonaccorso, A. Lombardo, T. Hasan, Z. P. Sun, L. Colombo, and A. C. Ferrari, “Production and processing of graphene and 2d crystals,” Mater. Today 15(12), 564–589 (2012). [CrossRef]

30.

F. Bonaccorso and Z. P. Sun, “Solution processing of graphene, topological insulators and other 2d crystals for ultrafast photonics,” Opt. Mater. Express 4(1), 63–78 (2014). [CrossRef]

31.

M. Sheikbahae, A. A. Said, T. H. Wei, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Vanstryland, “Sensitive measurement of optical nonlinearities using a single beam,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 26(4), 760–769 (1990). [CrossRef]

32.

S. Yumitori, “Correlation of c1s chemical state intensities with the o1s intensity in the xps analysis of anodically oxidized glass-like carbon samples,” J. Mater. Sci. 35(1), 139–146 (2000). [CrossRef]

33.

R. J. Waltman, J. Pacansky, and C. W. Bates, “X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic studies on organic photoconductors evaluation of atomic charges on chlorodiane blue and p(diethylamino)benzaldehyde diphenylhydrazone,” Chem. Mater. 5(12), 1799–1804 (1993). [CrossRef]

34.

A. C. Ferrari and J. Robertson, “Interpretation of raman spectra of disordered and amorphous carbon,” Phys. Rev. B 61(20), 14095–14107 (2000). [CrossRef]

35.

Y. Shen, P. Zhou, Q. Q. Sun, L. Wan, J. Li, L. Y. Chen, D. W. Zhang, and X. B. Wang, “Optical investigation of reduced graphene oxide by spectroscopic ellipsometry and the band-gap tuning,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 99(14), 141911 (2011). [CrossRef]

36.

S. Saxena, T. A. Tyson, S. Shukla, E. Negusse, H. Y. Chen, and J. M. Bai, “Investigation of structural and electronic properties of graphene oxide,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 99(1), 013104 (2011). [CrossRef]

37.

V. H. Pham, T. V. Cuong, T. D. Nguyen-Phan, H. D. Pham, E. J. Kim, S. H. Hur, E. W. Shin, S. Kim, and J. S. Chung, “One-step synthesis of superior dispersion of chemically converted graphene in organic solvents,” Chem. Commun. (Camb.) 46(24), 4375–4377 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

38.

D. I. Kovsh, S. Yang, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Van Stryland, “Nonlinear optical beam propagation for optical limiting,” Appl. Opt. 38(24), 5168–5180 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

39.

R. L. Sutherland, Handbook of Nonlinear Optics (Marcel Dekker, 1996).

40.

J. Robertson and E. P. O’Reilly, “Electronic and atomic structure of amorphous carbon,” Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter 35(6), 2946–2957 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(160.0160) Materials : Materials
(190.0190) Nonlinear optics : Nonlinear optics
(190.4710) Nonlinear optics : Optical nonlinearities in organic materials
(160.4236) Materials : Nanomaterials

ToC Category:
Materials

History
Original Manuscript: May 14, 2014
Revised Manuscript: July 3, 2014
Manuscript Accepted: July 7, 2014
Published: August 4, 2014

Citation
Hongfei Shi, Can Wang, Zhipei Sun, Yueliang Zhou, Kuijuan Jin, Simon A. T. Redfern, and Guozhen Yang, "Tuning the nonlinear optical absorption of reduced graphene oxide by chemical reduction," Opt. Express 22, 19375-19385 (2014)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-22-16-19375


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. F. Bonaccorso, Z. Sun, T. Hasan, and A. C. Ferrari, “Graphene photonics and optoelectronics,” Nat. Photonics4(9), 611–622 (2010). [CrossRef]
  2. R. R. Nair, P. Blake, A. N. Grigorenko, K. S. Novoselov, T. J. Booth, T. Stauber, N. M. R. Peres, and A. K. Geim, “Fine structure constant defines visual transparency of graphene,” Science320(5881), 1308 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. K. F. Mak, M. Y. Sfeir, Y. Wu, C. H. Lui, J. A. Misewich, and T. F. Heinz, “Measurement of the optical conductivity of graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett.101(19), 196405 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. M. Breusing, C. Ropers, and T. Elsaesser, “Ultrafast carrier dynamics in graphite,” Phys. Rev. Lett.102(8), 086809 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Z. P. Sun, T. Hasan, F. Torrisi, D. Popa, G. Privitera, F. Q. Wang, F. Bonaccorso, D. M. Basko, and A. C. Ferrari, “Graphene mode-locked ultrafast laser,” ACS Nano4(2), 803–810 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Z. P. Sun, D. Popa, T. Hasan, F. Torrisi, F. Q. Wang, E. J. R. Kelleher, J. C. Travers, V. Nicolosi, and A. C. Ferrari, “A stable, wideband tunable, near transform-limited, graphene-mode-locked, ultrafast laser,” Nano Res.3(9), 653–660 (2010). [CrossRef]
  7. T. Hasan, Z. P. Sun, F. Q. Wang, F. Bonaccorso, P. H. Tan, A. G. Rozhin, and A. C. Ferrari, “Nanotube-polymer composites for ultrafast photonics,” Adv. Mater.21(38–39), 3874–3899 (2009). [CrossRef]
  8. A. Martinez and Z. P. Sun, “Nanotube and graphene saturable absorbers for fibre lasers,” Nat. Photonics7(11), 842–845 (2013). [CrossRef]
  9. Z. Sun, T. Hasan, and A. C. Ferrari, “Ultrafast lasers mode-locked by nanotubes and graphene,” Physica E44(6), 1082–1091 (2012). [CrossRef]
  10. E. Hendry, P. J. Hale, J. Moger, A. K. Savchenko, and S. A. Mikhailov, “Coherent nonlinear optical response of graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett.105(9), 097401 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. A. Y. Bykov, T. V. Murzina, M. G. Rybin, and E. D. Obraztsova, “Second harmonic generation in multilayer graphene induced by direct electric current,” Phys. Rev. B85(12), 121413 (2012). [CrossRef]
  12. J. J. Dean and H. M. van Driel, “Graphene and few-layer graphite probed by second-harmonic generation: Theory and experiment,” Phys. Rev. B82(12), 125411 (2010). [CrossRef]
  13. H. Zhang, S. Virally, Q. L. Bao, L. K. Ping, S. Massar, N. Godbout, and P. Kockaert, “Z-scan measurement of the nonlinear refractive index of graphene,” Opt. Lett.37(11), 1856–1858 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. X. L. Zhang, Z. B. Liu, X. C. Li, Q. Ma, X. D. Chen, J. G. Tian, Y. F. Xu, and Y. S. Chen, “Transient thermal effect, nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption properties of graphene oxide sheets in dispersion,” Opt. Express21(6), 7511–7520 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. H. X. Chang, Z. H. Sun, Q. H. Yuan, F. Ding, X. M. Tao, F. Yan, and Z. J. Zheng, “Thin film field-effect phototransistors from bandgap-tunable, solution-processed, few-layer reduced graphene oxide films,” Adv. Mater.22(43), 4872–4876 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. L. Z. Liu, L. Wang, J. F. Gao, J. J. Zhao, X. F. Gao, and Z. F. Chen, “Amorphous structural models for graphene oxides,” Carbon50(4), 1690–1698 (2012). [CrossRef]
  17. G. Eda, Y. Y. Lin, C. Mattevi, H. Yamaguchi, H. A. Chen, I. S. Chen, C. W. Chen, and M. Chhowalla, “Blue photoluminescence from chemically derived graphene oxide,” Adv. Mater.22(4), 505–509 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. S. Y. Zhou, G. H. Gweon, A. V. Fedorov, P. N. First, W. A. de Heer, D. H. Lee, F. Guinea, A. H. Castro Neto, and A. Lanzara, “Substrate-induced bandgap opening in epitaxial graphene,” Nat. Mater.6(10), 770–775 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Y. B. Zhang, T. T. Tang, C. Girit, Z. Hao, M. C. Martin, A. Zettl, M. F. Crommie, Y. R. Shen, and F. Wang, “Direct observation of a widely tunable bandgap in bilayer graphene,” Nature459(7248), 820–823 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. S. F. Pei and H. M. Cheng, “The reduction of graphene oxide,” Carbon50(9), 3210–3228 (2012). [CrossRef]
  21. K. P. Loh, Q. Bao, G. Eda, and M. Chhowalla, “Graphene oxide as a chemically tunable platform for optical applications,” Nat. Chem.2(12), 1015–1024 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Z. B. Liu, Y. Wang, X. L. Zhang, Y. F. Xu, Y. S. Chen, and J. G. Tian, “Nonlinear optical properties of graphene oxide in nanosecond and picosecond regimes,” Appl. Phys. Lett.94(2), 021902 (2009). [CrossRef]
  23. X. L. Zhang, X. Zhao, Z. B. Liu, S. Shi, W. Y. Zhou, J. G. Tian, Y. F. Xu, and Y. S. Chen, “Nonlinear optical and optical limiting properties of graphene oxide-fe3o4 hybrid material,” J. Opt.13(7), 075202 (2011). [CrossRef]
  24. C. Gómez-Navarro, R. T. Weitz, A. M. Bittner, M. Scolari, A. Mews, M. Burghard, and K. Kern, “Electronic transport properties of individual chemically reduced graphene oxide sheets,” Nano Lett.7(11), 3499–3503 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. T. Remyamol, H. John, and P. Gopinath, “Synthesis and nonlinear optical properties of reduced graphene oxide covalently functionalized with polyaniline,” Carbon59, 308–314 (2013). [CrossRef]
  26. X. F. Jiang, L. Polavarapu, S. T. Neo, T. Venkatesan, and Q. H. Xu, “Graphene oxides as tunable broadband nonlinear optical materials for femtosecond laser pulses,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett.3(6), 785–790 (2012). [CrossRef]
  27. Z.-B. Liu, X. Zhao, X.-L. Zhang, X.-Q. Yan, Y.-P. Wu, Y.-S. Chen, and J.-G. Tian, “Ultrafast dynamics and nonlinear optical responses from sp2- and sp3-hybridized domains in graphene oxide,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett.2(16), 1972–1977 (2011). [CrossRef]
  28. S. Park, J. H. An, I. W. Jung, R. D. Piner, S. J. An, X. S. Li, A. Velamakanni, and R. S. Ruoff, “Colloidal suspensions of highly reduced graphene oxide in a wide variety of organic solvents,” Nano Lett.9(4), 1593–1597 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. F. Bonaccorso, A. Lombardo, T. Hasan, Z. P. Sun, L. Colombo, and A. C. Ferrari, “Production and processing of graphene and 2d crystals,” Mater. Today15(12), 564–589 (2012). [CrossRef]
  30. F. Bonaccorso and Z. P. Sun, “Solution processing of graphene, topological insulators and other 2d crystals for ultrafast photonics,” Opt. Mater. Express4(1), 63–78 (2014). [CrossRef]
  31. M. Sheikbahae, A. A. Said, T. H. Wei, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Vanstryland, “Sensitive measurement of optical nonlinearities using a single beam,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron.26(4), 760–769 (1990). [CrossRef]
  32. S. Yumitori, “Correlation of c1s chemical state intensities with the o1s intensity in the xps analysis of anodically oxidized glass-like carbon samples,” J. Mater. Sci.35(1), 139–146 (2000). [CrossRef]
  33. R. J. Waltman, J. Pacansky, and C. W. Bates, “X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic studies on organic photoconductors evaluation of atomic charges on chlorodiane blue and p(diethylamino)benzaldehyde diphenylhydrazone,” Chem. Mater.5(12), 1799–1804 (1993). [CrossRef]
  34. A. C. Ferrari and J. Robertson, “Interpretation of raman spectra of disordered and amorphous carbon,” Phys. Rev. B61(20), 14095–14107 (2000). [CrossRef]
  35. Y. Shen, P. Zhou, Q. Q. Sun, L. Wan, J. Li, L. Y. Chen, D. W. Zhang, and X. B. Wang, “Optical investigation of reduced graphene oxide by spectroscopic ellipsometry and the band-gap tuning,” Appl. Phys. Lett.99(14), 141911 (2011). [CrossRef]
  36. S. Saxena, T. A. Tyson, S. Shukla, E. Negusse, H. Y. Chen, and J. M. Bai, “Investigation of structural and electronic properties of graphene oxide,” Appl. Phys. Lett.99(1), 013104 (2011). [CrossRef]
  37. V. H. Pham, T. V. Cuong, T. D. Nguyen-Phan, H. D. Pham, E. J. Kim, S. H. Hur, E. W. Shin, S. Kim, and J. S. Chung, “One-step synthesis of superior dispersion of chemically converted graphene in organic solvents,” Chem. Commun. (Camb.)46(24), 4375–4377 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. D. I. Kovsh, S. Yang, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Van Stryland, “Nonlinear optical beam propagation for optical limiting,” Appl. Opt.38(24), 5168–5180 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. R. L. Sutherland, Handbook of Nonlinear Optics (Marcel Dekker, 1996).
  40. J. Robertson and E. P. O’Reilly, “Electronic and atomic structure of amorphous carbon,” Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter35(6), 2946–2957 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited