Home

Search

Collections

Journals

About

Contact us

My IOPscience

Antireflection properties of graphene layers on planar and textured silicon surfaces

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.
2013 Nanotechnology 24 165402
(http://iopscience.iop.org/0957-4484/24/16/165402)
View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:
IP Address: 118.102.164.202
This content was downloaded on 28/02/2014 at 09:42

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

IOP PUBLISHING

NANOTECHNOLOGY

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402 (8pp)

doi:10.1088/0957-4484/24/16/165402

Antireflection properties of graphene

layers on planar and textured silicon
surfaces
Rakesh Kumar1 , A K Sharma1 , Mehar Bhatnagar1 , B R Mehta1 and
Shyama Rath2
1

Thin Film Laboratory, Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas,
New Delhi 110016, India
2
Department of Physics and Astrophysics, University of Delhi, Delhi 110007, India
E-mail: brmehta@physics.iitd.ernet.in

Received 29 December 2012, in final form 20 February 2013

Published 27 March 2013
Online at stacks.iop.org/Nano/24/165402
Abstract
In this study, theoretical and experimental investigations have been carried out to explore the
suitability of graphene layers as an antireflection coating. Microwave plasma enhanced
chemical vapor deposition and chemically grown graphene layers deposited on polished and
textured silicon surfaces show that graphene deposition results in a large decrease in
reflectance in the wavelength range of 300650 nm, especially in the case of polished silicon.
A Si3 N4 /textured silicon reference antireflection coating and graphene deposited polished and
textured silicon exhibit similar reflectance values, with the graphene/Si surface showing lower
reflectance in the 300400 nm range. Comparison of experimental results with the finite
difference time domain calculations shows that the graphene along with a SiO2 surface layer
results in a decrease in reflectance in the 300650 nm range, with a reflectance value of <5%
for the case of graphene deposited textured silicon surfaces. The monolayer and inert character
along with the high transmittance of graphene make it an ideal surface layer. The results of the
present study show its suitability as an antireflection coating in solar cell and UV detector
applications.
(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

340 50 N m1 , 690 120 N m1 and 42 4 N m1 ,

respectively, corresponding to a Youngs modulus of 1.0 0.1
TPa [6]. Startlingly low absorption with high transmittance
of 9698% in the UVvisible region has been estimated
for monolayer graphene [7, 8]. High electron mobility and
high optical transmittance make it inherently attractive as
a transparent electrode in optoelectronic devices and it
has been used or proposed in a number of optical and
electronic devices. A grapheneSi Schottky junction [9] has
shown a photovoltaic conversion efficiency of 8.6% [10].
Graphene layers have also been used to modify the interface
properties of a TiCuOCu junction where the introduction
of multilayer graphene (MLG) in between CuOCu leads
to the observation of bipolar resistive switching [11]. Due
to its remarkable optoelectronic properties, a number of

1. Introduction
Graphene with its two-dimensional honeycomb lattice of
tightly packed carbon atoms has attracted phenomenal
interest due to its new physics and unique electronic,
electrical, mechanical and optical properties. The mobility
of charge carriers in suspended graphene samples goes up
to 200 000 cm2 V1 s1 for carrier densities below 5
109 cm2 at temperatures near absolute zero [1, 2]. The
experimentally measured values of thermal conductivity (at
room temperature) and the thermoelectric power of graphene
are 30005000 W mK1 [3] and 50100 V K1 [4, 5],
respectively. Recent experiments have established graphene
as the strongest material with second-, third-order elastic
stiffness and intrinsic strength for monolayer graphene of
0957-4484/13/165402+08$33.00

c 2013 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK & the USA

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402

R Kumar et al

Flow of all the gases was stopped as the temperature reached

close to room temperature.
To study the deposition and optical properties of graphene
deposition of Si, the graphene from the Cu foil was transferred
onto a Si substrate. The transfer process involved several
steps [20]. In the first step, polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)
(Sigma Aldrich, average MW 996 000, item no. 182265,
6 wt% in anisole) was spin coated on one side of the Cu
foil. The other side of the Cu foil was exposed to O2 plasma
to remove graphene from that side since graphene growth is
known to take place on both sides of Cu foil. In a second
step, Cu foil was etched out using FeCl3 (10%, wt/vol.) for
34 h and subsequently PMMA/graphene film was cleaned
several times in a bath of de-ionized water and carefully
transferred to a quartz and silicon substrate. Thereafter, the
sample was allowed to dry for 12 h and then PMMA was
removed using acetone for 5 h at a temperature of 50 C. The
sample was further treated for 5 h in a H2 (200 sccm) and Ar
(30 sccm) environment at a temperature of 450 C to remove
the remaining traces of PMMA [20, 21].
Chemically prepared graphene films (containing 92%
carbon, <8% oxygen) produced via thermal exfoliation
reduction and hydrogen reduction of single-layer graphene
oxide was obtained from ACS Material USA and was
also used for studying the deposition and optical properties
of graphene deposition on Si substrate. The 2 mg of
as-obtained graphene powder was dispersed in 5 ml of
N, N-dimethylformamide (DMF) organic solvent, which
exhibited long-term dispersion stability, using ultra-sonication
and further spin coated on the desired substrate [22].
Raman spectroscopic measurements were carried out
in backscattering geometry using the 514.5 nm line of the
Ar+ laser for excitation. The scattered light was analyzed
with a Renishaw spectrometer and a charged couple device
was employed for detection. A Quanta 3D FEI field
emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM) was used
to ascertain the morphology of the graphene films. Atomic
force microscopy (AFM) was done in contact mode using a
Nanoscope IIIa instrument from Digital Instruments, USA.
All the optical spectra were recorded on a PerkinElmer
Lambda 35 UV/Vis spectrophotometer.
As already mentioned, polished planar and anisotropically etched textured silicon surface substrates are used in
the present study. A chemically and mechanically polished
p-type Czochralski silicon wafer substrate (h100i oriented,
300 m thick, textured Si substrate having a pyramid structure
of height 812 m) was used for the study. A polished Si
substrate as obtained from the supplier was used in the present
study without removing native oxide. In textured Si samples,
the final step of oxide removal after texturing the Si was
also not carried out. The textured Si substrate reduces the
net reflection of visible light and thereby increases optical
absorption in silicon. As silicon nitride (Si3 N4 ) is widely used
in the industrial manufacture of Si solar cells as an ARC we
chose a plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposited Si3 N4
of thickness 80 nm coating as a reference to compare the
antireflection properties of graphene deposited on planar and
textured silicon surfaces.

reviews have highlighted that graphene is likely to benefit

photovoltaics devices as a near transparent electrode and
antireflection coating [1217]. This study is a first attempt
to examine the suitability of few-layer graphene as an
antireflection coating on polished and textured silicon, which
are commonly used in solar cell structures.
An antireflection coating (ARC) is an integral part of
optoelectronic device fabrication technology. For a fixed
wavelength, the phase relationship condition requires the
optical thickness of the layer (the refractive index multiplied
by the physical thickness) to be equal to a quarter the
wavelength of the incoming wave and the refractive index
to be the geometric mean of the refractive index of the
semiconductor and air. For photovoltaic applications, the
reflectance is minimized for a wavelength of 0.6 m which
is close to the maximum power point of the solar spectrum.
By increasing the number of layers of different refractive
index and thickness, the reflectance can be decreased over
a wider spectral range. In silicon solar cell technology,
texturing of the silicon surface using chemical etchants and
subsequent coating of silicon nitride (Si3 N4 ) is commonly
used to reduce the reflection losses from 4058% for polished
Si to 515% [18]. The monolayer character of a graphene
layer makes it an ideal surface layer which can adhere well
to a planar, textured or corrugated surface.
We report the antireflection properties of graphene films
on polished surface (PS) and chemically textured surface
(TS) commonly used in Si solar cell technology. Graphene
layers formed by microwave plasma enhanced chemical vapor
deposition (MPCVD) and chemical methods (chemically
prepared graphene, RGO) are dispersed on silicon surfaces
and reflectance was measured in the wavelength range
300650 nm. The experimental results are compared with
those for a standard Si3 N4 ARC used in silicon solar cell
technology. The optical properties of graphene layers having
different configurations on silicon surfaces were studied using
the finite difference time domain (FDTD) simulation [19]. The
measured reflectance for both types of graphene deposited
substrates was compared with simulated results.

2. Experimental details
Two types of graphene layers (i) prepared using the MPCVD
technique (designated as G1) and (ii) prepared using a
chemical route (RGO) procured from ACS Materials USA
(designated as G2) were used in this study.
The graphene films were grown on 25 m thick Cu foil
(99.98%, Sigma Aldrich, item no. 349208) using the MPCVD
technique with CH4 , H2 and Ar as the precursor forming
gases. Before deposition, Cu foil was cleaned in acetic acid
followed by de-ionized water and isopropyl alcohol to remove
the copper oxide present at the surface. Keeping the copper
foil substrate at a temperature of about 750 C, a plasma was
created by using H2 (400 sccm) and Ar (30 sccm) at a gas
pressure of 30 Torr with a microwave (2.45 GHz) power of
1.5 kW. After annealing the Cu foil for about 20 min, CH4
(10 sccm) was introduced and a graphene layer was deposited
for 5 min. The substrate was allowed to cool down naturally.
2

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402

R Kumar et al

Figure 1. The Raman spectra, AFM micrograph and section profile are shown in (a), (b) and (c) for G1; and (d), (e) and (f) for G2,
respectively.

3. Result and discussion

as the residual oxygen and point defects in the RGO film.

Figures 1(e) and (f) show the AFM and section profile images
of RGO film, respectively. Some wrinkles and folding in the
RGO film could be clearly seen. The thickness of the RGO
film calculated from the section profile analysis, as shown
in figure 1(f), has been observed to be 1.21 nm. At some
points, the thickness seems to be higher due to the presence
of the folding and wrinkles in the RGO film. The presence
of functional groups, structural defects and adsorbed water
molecules is known to result in a greater thickness of the RGO
monolayer compared to monolayer graphene prepared by the
MPCVD method [2527].
Figure 2 shows a FESEM micrograph of graphene layers
deposited on silicon surfaces of polished samples G1PS
(figure 2(a)) and G2PS (figure 2(c)) and textured samples
G1TS (figure 2(b)) and G2TS (figure 2(d)). In sample
G1PS, graphene with some wrinkles is observed to follow
most of the specimen surface. In sample G1TS, graphene
appears to be well settled on the pyramids. In sample G2PS,
graphene layers are non-uniformly deposited and seem to be
agglomerated in comparison to sample G1PS. In sample
G2TS, graphene seems to be unattached to the pyramids at a
number of points.

3.1. Elemental and morphological characterization of

graphene films
Figure 1(a) shows the Raman spectra of graphene deposited
on Cu foil using the MPCVD method. As is well known,
the three most prominent features of graphene, corresponding
to the D peak at 1350 cm1 , the G peak at 1580 cm1
and the 2D peak at 2680 cm1 , are observed [23]. The
D peak is a defect-induced Raman feature observed due to
disorder or defects at the edge of the graphene. The G peak
is known to be an indication of the sp2 carbon networks in
the sample. In our sample, the intensity of the D peak is quite
small which indicates defect-free growth of the graphene film.
The 2D peak originates from a second-order Raman process
and can be used to determine the thickness of graphene. The
intensity ratio (I2D /IG ) higher than 1.9 indicates the formation
of single-layer graphene in the presented sample [24]. The
thickness of graphene was further confirmed by using section
profile analysis of the AFM image. Figure 1(b) shows the
AFM image of the graphene layer on the Si substrate. Some
wrinkles may be seen in the graphene film. The thickness
of the graphene film calculated from the section profile
analysis, as shown in figure 1(c), has been observed to be
0.352 nm, which indicates the presence of a single layer of
grapheme [25]. This is in good agreement with the results
obtained from the intensity ratio of the 2D peak to the G peak
in Raman spectra.
Figure 1(d) shows the Raman spectra of chemically
prepared graphene (RGO). The dominance of the D peak in
the Raman spectra indicates the presence of disorder in the
RGO film. This may be due to the presence of folding as well

3.2. Optical characterization of graphene films

Figure 3(a) illustrates the transmittance spectra of graphene
film G1 on quartz glass (sample G1Q), showing 8897%
transmittance in the 300650 nm wavelength range. This is
considered to fulfil the provision of a transparent coating
in solar cell and other optoelectronic devices [28]. The
reflectance spectra show that the graphene overlayer on the
polished Si surface on sample G1PS results in a drastic
3

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402

R Kumar et al

Figure 2. FESEM micrograph of MPCVD prepared graphene film G1 transferred on (a) polished Si (G1PS) and (b) textured Si (G1TS)
substrate and chemically prepared graphene film G2 spin coated on (c) polished Si (G2PS) and (d) textured Si (G2TS) substrate,
respectively.

reduction in the reflectance value from 8843% to 1711% in

the 300650 nm wavelength range. In the case of the graphene
layer on a textured Si surface in sample G1TS, a reduction
in reflectance from 1915% to 814% in the 300650 nm
wavelength range is observed. It may be noted that although
the reflectance of sample G1TS is 8% lower than that of
sample G1PS (17%), reduction in the reflectance value on
graphene deposition is more in G1PS than in G1TS, with
respect to the PS and TS samples without a graphene layer.
Figure 3(b) shows the transmittance spectra of graphene
film G2 on quartz glass (sample G2Q) and shows 8292%
transmittance in the 300650 nm wavelength range. The
transmittance value of sample G2Q is lower than that of
sample G1Q. This may be due to the difference in the
quality and thickness of the RGO monolayer from that of
the graphene layer prepared by MPCVD [25]. Graphene
deposition on the polished Si surface sample G2PS reduces
the reflectance value from 8843% to 7735%, higher than
that obtained for sample G1PS in the 300650 nm range. The
reason for such a difference in the reflectance values may be
attributed to the different morphology of graphene deposited
on samples G1PS and G2PS, particularly noticeable in
figures 2(a) and (c) respectively. This observation indicates
the decisive role of graphene deposition morphology, and
thereby of the deposition scheme, to exploit the antireflection
characteristics of graphene. In the case of graphene deposition
on the textured Si surface sample G2TS the percentage

reflectance decreases from 1915% to 157% almost the same

as that obtained for sample G1TS in the 300650 nm range.
Figure 3(c) illustrates a comparison of the reflectance
spectra of MPCVD prepared graphene on a textured Si
substrate (sample G1TS) and chemically prepared graphene
on a textured Si substrate (sample G2TS) with the reference
antireflection coating of silicon nitride (Si3 N4 ) on a textured
Si substrate (sample SNTS) in the 300650 nm wavelength
range. It is important to note that the reflectance spectrum
of sample SNTS is about 309% in the 300650 nm
wavelength range with a peak value of 35% at 330 nm. The
graphene overlayer on textured Si in sample G1TS shows
reflectance values of 813% in the 300430 nm range, well
below the reflectance values of SNTS substrate in same
range. In the wavelength range 440650 nm, the reflectance
value of 14% for the G1TS sample is 4% more than the
reflectance values of the SNTS sample. In sample G2TS,
the reflectance values of 147% are better than the reflectance
values for SNTS in the 300650 nm wavelength range.
In summary: (i) G1TS and G2TS respond with
very similar reflectance values <15% in the 300650 nm
wavelength range; (ii) the G1TS and G2TS samples
more or less follow the reference ARC sample SNTS
in the 450650 nm range and are somewhat better in
300400 nm wavelength range. The reflectance response of
graphene deposited samples in the 300400 nm UV region
make them promising candidates for nanoscale ultraviolet
4

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402

R Kumar et al

Figure 3. (a) Measured transmittance and reflectance as a function of wavelength of a MPCVD prepared graphene layer (G1) deposited on
quartz glass (G1Q) and polished Si (G1PS) textured Si substrate (G1TS), respectively. (b) Measured transmittance and reflectance as a
function of wavelength of a chemically prepared graphene layer (G2) deposited on quartz glass (G2Q) and polished Si (G2PS) textured Si
substrate (G2TS), respectively. (c) Measured reflectance as a function of wavelength of reference silicon nitride ARC on textured Si
(SNTS) MPCVD prepared graphene layer (G1) and chemically prepared graphene layer (G2) deposited on textured Si substrate.

photo-detectors and other UV sensitive photo-electronic

devices [29].

graphene is assumed to be a normal bulk material with the

thickness of each layer being 1 nm, the thickness of SiO2
40 nm and the pyramid height of the textured Si surface
1 m. As already mentioned in the experimental section, the
native oxide on Si samples (PS and TS) was not etched out.
Therefore, the 40 nm thickness of SiO2 assumed in the FDTD
simulation corresponds to the native oxide.
Figure 4(a) shows the reflectance spectra of model
configuration (IIV) in the case of a polished Si (PS) surface
in the 300650 nm wavelength range. The reflectance of a bare
polished Si substrate without graphene or SiO2 overlayers
is calculated as 6034%. On assuming two graphene layers
on polished Si the reflectance drops to 4732% in the
300650 nm wavelength range. The presence of a SiO2
overlayer on polished Si significantly affects the reflectance
value. With a 40 nm thick SiO2 layer the reflectance value
reduced to 3828% on polished silicon. Subsequently, an
addition of two graphene layers of thickness 1 nm each
reflectance was found to reduce 2024% in the 300650 nm
wavelength range.
Figure 4(b) shows the reflectance spectra of model
configurations (VVIII) in the case of a textured Si (TS)
surface in the 300650 nm wavelength range. Reflectance of a

3.3. Reflectance spectra of different model configurations

using FDTD simulation
The effect of graphene deposition on the reflectance of
polished and textured Si surfaces was also evaluated using
FDTD simulation via the Lumerical package [19]. A plane
light wave was launched normally to the substrate. Perfectly
matched layer (PML) conduction was used for the boundary
of the simulation window, which absorbs the energy without
inducing any reflection. An override mesh of 0.5 nm was used
to resolve the graphene film. In this simulation, graphene of
thickness 1 nm with optical constants taken from [30, 31]
was used in the simulation models. The simulation models
are as follows: I, polished Si (PS); II, polished Si with two
graphene layers (PS + G + G); III, polished Si with SiO2
(PS + SO); IV, polished Si with SiO2 layer and two graphene
layers (PS + SO + G + G); V, textured Si (TS); VI, textured
Si with two graphene layers (TS + G + G); VII, textured Si
with SiO2 (TS + SO); VIII, textured Si with SiO2 layer and
two graphene layers (TS + SO + G + G). In this simulation,
5

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402

R Kumar et al

two-dimensional FDTD simulation [19] was carried out. The

model configurations assumed for this are: (i) textured Si
with silicon nitride (TS + SN) as reference antireflection
model configuration; (ii) polished Si with SiO2 and then two
graphene layers (PS + SO + G + G) and (iii) textured Si with
SiO2 and then two graphene layers (TS + SO + G + G). These
model configurations will be referred as M1, M2 and M3,
respectively. Here again we assume graphene to be a normal
bulk material with the thickness of each layer being 1 nm, the
thickness of silicon nitride is 80 nm, the thickness of SiO2 is
40 nm and the pyramid height of textured Si surface is 1 m.
From figures 5(a)(c), at 300 nm, the electric field
intensity distribution for the reference antireflection model
configuration M1 shows that the light in not well trapped
inside the Si pyramidal structure and the magnitude of
intensity is lower outside Si for model configurations M2
and M3. This observation states that the reflectance is less
for model configurations M2 and M3 in comparison with
M1. This is consistent with the experimental results of
lower reflectance for sample G1PS and G1TS shown in
figure 3(a). At 600 nm, the electric field intensity distribution
of the reference antireflection model configuration M1 shows
weak intensity outside the Si pyramidal structure, also
followed by model configurations M2 and M3, consistent
with its antireflection properties at this wavelength value
shown in figure 3(c). The electric field intensity distribution
shown in figure 5(c) implies that the model configuration M3
has lower reflectance than the reference antireflection model
configuration M1 at 300 nm and almost the same reflectance
at 600 nm.
The comparison of experimental and simulated results
shows that the presence of SiO2 and a graphene layer, on
both PS and TS substrates, results in a significant reduction
in reflectance values throughout the UVvisible spectral
range. Both PS and TS substrates used in the experimental
investigation are expected to have 2040 nm of SiO2 . The
assumption of a 1 nm thick graphene layer in the calculation
was done keeping in mind the two to three monolayer
graphene, especially in case of the chemically prepared
sample G2. It is important to note that without the presence
of SiO2 layer, inclusion of two to three graphene layers in the
model configuration did not result in a significant reduction in
reflectance. It is worth noting that graphene transferred onto
silicon substrates has some wrinkles and defects. Especially
in the case of textured Si (as shown in figures 2(b) and (d)),
poor adhesion seems to have resulted in locally suspended and
loosely adherent graphene. This can significantly affect the
transmittance value.
It is clear that a SiO2 overlayer is essential to realize the
antireflection properties of graphene. Similar inferences have
been drawn in a study on the identification of graphene by the
total color difference method, which shows that a 72 nm thick
Al2 O3 film is most suited for this purpose [32]. Normally
SiO2 or Si3 N4 films are used for graphene identification [33].
These results indicate that the dielectric thickness and number
of graphene layers can be the control parameters to reduce the
reflectance of the silicon substrate in a particular wavelength
range. Near field enhancement of plasmonic nanostructures

Figure 4. Calculated reflectance as a function of wavelength of

different model configurations: (a) I, polished Si (PS); II, polished
Si with two graphene layers of thickness 1 nm each (PS + G + G);
III, polished Si with 40 nm thick SiO2 (PS + SO); IV, polished Si
with 40 nm thick SiO2 and then two graphene layers of thickness
1 nm each (PS + SO + G + G); (b) V, textured Si (TS), textured Si
with two graphene layer of 1 nm thickness each (TS + G + G); VI,
textured Si with 40 nm thick SiO2 (TS + SO); and VII, textured Si
with 40 nm thick SiO2 and then two graphene layer of thickness
1 nm each (TS + SO + G + G).

bare textured Si substrate without graphene or SiO2 overlayers

is 3712%. The difference in the reflectance value from
the experimentally measured 1915% in the 300650 nm
wavelength range may be due to difference between pyramids
height of the experimental textured Si substrate and the
theoretically assumed values. On assuming two graphene
layers on a textured Si surface, no significant change was
observed in reflectance values. With a SiO2 overlayer on
a textured Si surface the reflectance attains 108% in the
300650 nm wavelength range. Subsequent addition of two
graphene layers of thickness 1 nm causes the reflectance to
drop to 36% in the 300650 nm wavelength range.
3.4. Electric field intensity distribution of different model
configurations using FDTD simulation
In order to see the light trapping effect via the electric
field intensity distribution inside and around the Si material
for different model configurations of polished Si and
textured Si surfaces at wavelengths of 300 and 600 nm,
6

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402

R Kumar et al

Figure 5. FDTD simulated electric field intensity distribution for different model configurations: (a) M1, silicon nitride reference
antireflection coating on textured Si (TS + SN); (b) M2, polished Si with SiO2 and then two graphene layers (PS + SO + G + G); and
(c) M3, textured Si with SiO2 and then two graphene layers (TS + SO + G + G). The vertical scale Y (m) is the silicon to source stack
height and the horizontal scale X (m) is material width.

300650 nm, with an enormous decrease in case of polished

silicon. Si3 N4 reference antireflection coating and graphene
deposited polished and textured silicon is observed to have
similar reflectance values in the 450650 nm range. In the
300400 nm range, graphene/Si surfaces show significantly
lower reflectance values (810% in comparison to about 30%
in the case of Si3 N4 ). The FDTD calculations show that
the presence of a SiO2 intermediate layer is an important
requirement for the observed decrease in reflectance in the
300650 nm range. It is conjectured that thickness of SiO2
and the number of graphene layers can be varied to achieve
low reflectance in a desired wavelength range. Deposition
of graphene onto large areas seems to be important for
exploiting its antireflection properties for photovoltaic and
other optoelectronic applications.

has been used to explain the spectral selectivity of graphene

layers [34]. A combination of high Fermi velocity in graphene
and the presence of high electric field at the graphenesilicon
interface has been proposed to explain the high quantum
efficiency of graphene-layer-based photovoltaic cells [35]. An
increased degree of field enhancement and interaction strength
has been proposed in graphene layers having 2D, 1D and 0D
confinement [36]. In addition to refractive index matching,
the above effects may also influence the reflectance and the
antireflection properties of graphene layers deposited on a
silicon surface. The inert nature of the graphene layer may
be an additional advantage in antireflection applications. It
may be interesting to explore the passivation properties of
graphene on silicon surfaces.

4. Conclusion

Acknowledgments

We have studied the optical reflectance of few-layer MPCVD

and chemically grown graphene deposited on polished and
textured silicon surfaces and compared these results with
the Si3 N4 /textured silicon reference ARC. The results of the
present study show that the graphene overlayers result in
a large decrease in reflectance in the wavelength range of

The authors thank Ms Pratha Jhawar, Mr S Ravi and Mr Saji

Salkalachen from the Semiconductor Device and Photovoltaic
Department, BHEL, Bangalore, for discussion related to this
work.
7

Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 165402

R Kumar et al

References

[18] Singh P K, Kumar R, Lal M, Singh S N and Das B K 2001

Effectiveness of anisotropic etching of silicon in aqueous
alkaline solutions Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 70 10313
[19] Lumerical FDTD Solutions. www.lumerical.com
[20] van der Zande A M, Barton R A, Alden J S, Ruiz-Vargas C S,
Whitney W S, Pham P H Q, Park J, Parpia J M,
Craighead H G and McEuen P L 2010 Large-scale arrays of
single-layer graphene resonators Nano Lett. 10 486973
[21] Li X et al 2009 Large-area synthesis of high-quality and
uniform graphene films on copper foils Science 324 13124
[22] Paredes J I, Villar-Rodil S, Martnez-Alonso A and
Tascon J M D 2008 Graphene oxide dispersions in organic
solvents Langmuir 24 105604
[23] Ferrari A C et al 2006 Raman spectrum of graphene and
graphene layers Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 187401
[24] Ferrari A C 2007 Raman spectroscopy of graphene and
graphite: disorder, electronphonon coupling, doping and
nonadiabatic effects Solid State Commun. 143 4757
[25] Eda G, Fanchini G and Chhowalla M 2008 Large-area
ultrathin films of reduced graphene oxide as a transparent
and flexible electronic material Nature Nanotechnology
3 2704
[26] McAllister M J et al 2007 Single sheet functionalized
graphene by oxidation and thermal expansion of graphite
Chem. Mater. 19 439604
[27] Stankovich S, Dikin D A, Piner R D, Kohlhaas K A,
Kleinhammes A, Jia Y, Wu Y, Nguyen T S and
Ruoff S R 2007 Synthesis of graphene-based nanosheets
via chemical reduction of exfoliated graphite oxide Carbon
45 155865
[28] Wang S J, Geng Y, Zheng Q and Kim J-K 2010 Fabrication of
highly conducting and transparent graphene films Carbon
48 181523
[29] Chitara B, Krupanidhi S B and Rao C N R 2011 Solution
processed reduced graphene oxide ultraviolet detector Appl.
Phys. Lett. 99 113114
[30] Weber J W, Calado V E and van de Sanden M C M 2010
Optical constants of graphene measured by spectroscopic
ellipsometry Appl. Phys. Lett. 97 091904
[31] Bruna M and Borini S 2009 Optical constants of graphene
layers in the visible range Appl. Phys. Lett. 94 031901
[32] Gao L, Ren W, Li F and Cheng H-M 2008 Total color
difference for rapid and accurate identification of graphene
ACS Nano 2 162533
[33] Jung I, Rhyee J-S, Son J Y, Ruoff R S and Rhee K-Y 2012
Colors of graphene and graphene-oxide multilayers on
various substrates Nanotechnology 23 025708
[34] Liu Y, Cheng R, Liao L, Zhou H, Bai J, Liu G, Liu L,
Huang Y and Duan X 2011 Plasmon resonance enhanced
multicolour photodetection by graphene Nature Commun.
2 579
[35] Grigorenko A N, Polini M and Novoselov K S 2012 Graphene
plasmonics Nature Photon. 6 74958
[36] Koppens F H L, Chang D E and Garca de Abajo F J 2011
Graphene plasmonics: a platform for strong lightmatter
interactions Nano Lett. 11 33707

[1] Du X, Skachko I, Barker A and Andrei E Y 2008 Approaching

ballistic transport in suspended graphene Nature
Nanotechnology 3 4915
[2] Pati S K, Enoki T and Rao C N R (ed) 2011 Graphene and its
Fascinating Attributes (Singapore: World Scientific)
[3] Balandin A A 2011 Thermal properties of graphene and
nanostructured carbon materials Nature Mater. 10 56981
[4] Wei P, Bao W, Pu Y, Lau C N and Shi J 2009 Anomalous
thermoelectric transport of dirac particles in graphene Phys.
Rev. Lett. 102 166808
[5] Checkelsky J G and Ong N P 2009 Thermopower and Nernst
effect in graphene in a magnetic field Phys. Rev. B
80 081413
[6] Lee C, Wei X, Kysar J W and Hone J 2008 Measurement of
the elastic properties and intrinsic strength of monolayer
graphene Science 321 3858
[7] Nair R R, Blake P, Grigorenko A N, Novoselov K S,
Booth T J, Stauber T, Peres N M R and Geim A K 2008
Fine structure constant defines visual transparency of
graphene Science 320 1308
[8] Lee C, Kim J Y, Bae S, Kim K S, Hong B H and
Choi E J 2011 Optical response of large scale single layer
graphene Appl. Phys. Lett. 98 071905
[9] Li X, Zhu H, Wang K, Cao A, Wei J, Li C, Jia Y, Li Z,
Li X and Wu D 2010 Graphene-on-silicon Schottky
junction solar cells Adv. Mater. 22 27438
[10] Miao X, Tongay S, Petterson M K, Berke K, Rinzler A G,
Appleton B R and Hebard A F 2012 High efficiency
graphene solar cells by chemical doping Nano Lett.
12 274550
[11] Singh B, Mehta B R, Govind, Feng X and Mullen K 2011
Electronic interaction and bipolar resistive switching in
copper oxidemultilayer graphene hybrid interface:
graphene as an oxygen ion storage and blocking layer Appl.
Phys. Lett. 99 222109
[12] Bae S et al 2010 Roll-to-roll production of 30-inch graphene
films for transparent electrodes Nature Nanotechnology
5 5748
[13] Weber C M et al 2010 Graphene-based optically transparent
electrodes for spectroelectrochemistry in the UVvis region
Small 6 1849
[14] Wu J, Agrawal M, Becerril H A, Bao Z, Liu Z, Chen Y and
Peumans P 2009 Organic light-emitting diodes on
solution-processed graphene transparent electrodes ACS
Nano 4 438
[15] He M, Jung J, Qiu F and Lin Z 2012 Graphene-based
transparent flexible electrodes for polymer solar cells
J. Mater. Chem. 22 2425464
[16] Won R 2010 Photovoltaics: graphenesilicon solar cells
Nature Photon. 4 411
[17] Cooper D R et al 2012 Experimental review of graphene ISRN
Condens. Matter Phys. 2012 56