Proceedings of the 14th International Heat Transfer Conference

IHTC14
August 8-13, 2010, Washington, DC, USA

IHTC14-
EXTRAORDINARY THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY OF GRAPHENE: PROSPECTS OF THERMAL
MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS

1,2 1,3 1,3 1,4 1

Suchismita Ghosh , Denis L. Nika , Evgenni P. Pokatilov , Irene Calizo and Alexander A. Balandin
1
Nano-Device Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering,
University of California – Riverside, Riverside, California 92521 USA
2
Intel Corporation, Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 USA
3
Department of Theoretical Physics, Moldova State University, Chisinau, MD-2009, Moldova
4
National institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 USA

ABSTRACT: materials known to date. In this review work we will

We have recently discovered experimentally that
suspended graphene, which is an individual sheet
of sp2-hybridized carbon bound in two dimensions
(2D), reveal an extremely high thermal conductivity.
The measurements were performed using a non-
contact optical technique developed by us on the
basis of Raman spectroscopy. A large number of
graphene flakes were suspended across trenches
in Si wafers and attached to heat sinks. The flakes
were heated by the focused laser light in the middle
of the suspended portion of graphene. The amount
of laser power dissipated in graphene and
corresponding local temperature rise were
determined from the integrated intensity and
spectral position of graphene’s Raman G mode.
The position of the G peak as a function of the
sample temperature was measured independently
allowing the use of micro-Raman spectrometer as a
“thermometer”. The experimental thermal
conductivity values were in the range of ~ 3000 –
5300 W/mK near room temperature (RT) and
depended on the graphene flake sizes. The thermal
conductivity of graphene is the highest among all
describe the details of our measurement procedure
and explain theoretically why the 2D thermal
conductivity of graphene is higher than that of bulk
graphite provided that the size of graphene flakes is
sufficiently large. Our theory, which includes the
phonon-mode dependent Gruneisen parameter and
phonon scattering on edges and defects, gives
results, which are in excellent agreement with the
experiment. Superior thermal properties of
graphene are beneficial for the proposed graphene
electronic devices, and may pave the way for
graphene’s thermal management applications.
INTRODUCTION:
In scientific and engineering research communities,
there has been an increasing interest to thermal
conductivity of nanostructured materials. With
device miniaturization trend and the continual
progress in microelectronic and optoelectronic
industries, heat removal and thermal management
issues have gained critical importance. Increasing
integration density and speed of ICs lead to

1 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 increased heat dissipation and formation of the
local hot spots inside the chips [1, 2]. Also from the
fundamental science point of view, the heat
conduction capability of a material is deeply
ingrained in its atomic structure and an
understanding of thermal conductivity can shed
light on other properties of a material. For this
reason it is important to investigate thermal
properties of materials at nanometer scale and
identify materials with the extremely large or
extremely low thermal conductivity for applications
as heat spreaders or heat insulators.
Recently, our group has discovered experimentally
that the free standing sheet of graphene [3, 4] has
an extraordinarily high value of thermal conductivity
[5, 6]. A unique non-contact optical technique
based on micro-Raman spectroscopy was adopted
for our measurements [5,6]. The local temperature
rise in graphene resulting from the laser heating
was determined through the temperature
coefficients of the G peaks in Raman spectra of
graphene [7,8]. These experimental findings paved
the way for theoretical work on the subject. A
detailed numerical study of the thermal conductivity
of graphene was performed using the phonon
dispersion using the valence-force field method
(VFF) [9]. In this work, the three-phonon Umklapp
scattering was treated by directly taking into
account all the allowable phonon relaxation channel
in the 2-D Brillouin zone (BZ) of graphene. Later,
the thermal conductance of graphene was
calculated by Jiang et al. [10] in the pure ballistic
limit and he obtained a very high value as is
expected in the case of ballistic regime with no
scattering. Lan et al. [11] calculated the thermal
conductivity of graphene nano-ribbons as K=3410
W/mK by combining the phonon non-equilibrium
Green’s function method with the tight-binding
approach. These values are very well in agreement
with our experimental values [5, 6] though the
values are well above the limit for bulk graphite,
~2000 W/mk.
In this review work, we will discuss in some details
2 Copyright © 2010 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
the experimental and theoretical work on the
thermal conductivity of suspended single layer
(SLG) graphene. The suspended portion of
graphene guarantees that there is no interaction
between the substrate and graphene flake and also
the calculations are performed for graphene in free
space. The high values of thermal conductivity, K
obtained experimentally can be explained in the
light of Klemens’ theory.
THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY MEASUREMENT OF
GRAPHENE:
Graphene has clear signatures in Raman spectra
with distinct G and 2D peaks [12-15]. This gave us
the idea of using Raman spectroscopy as a non-
contact optical approach for measuring thermal
conductivity of suspended graphene layers. In
addition, it was also found that the G peak of
graphene manifests a strong temperature
dependence [7, 8]. This means that the positional
shift in G peak in response to laser heating can be
used to measure the local temperature rise.
Essentially, in our experiments, micro-Raman
spectrometer was used as a “thermometer”. For a
sample with known geometry and proper heat
sinks, the correlation between temperature rise and
amount of power dissipated in graphene can give
us the value of K. Even a small amount of power
dissipated in graphene can result in notable
temperature rise and thereby induce a detectable
shift in the G peak position. This is mostly due to
one atomic layer thickness of single layer
graphene. Figure 1 is the schematic representation
of the experimental set up.
As a first step, we needed to know the temperature
coefficient of graphene’s G peak, χG.. For this
purpose, the laser excitation power was maintained
at a minimum value and the graphene sample was
placed in a hot-cold cell and temperature was
changed externally [7, 8]. The change in
temperature, expressed as T, can be correlated
with the shift in the G peak position ω, thereby
 using the micro-Raman spectrometer as a
thermometer. Local heating is induced in the
graphene layer by changing the excitation laser
power in order to facilitate the measurement of
thermal conductivity. Local temperature rise can be
expressed as T=ωG/χG. Interestingly, the
measurement technique is steady state. The data
acquisition for thermal conductivity measurement
i.e. recording of individual G peak position as a
function of the excitation power takes considerable
time; on the order of several minutes. This makes
the process steady state. The phonons are the
carriers of heat energy. However, the energy
deposited by the laser light to the electron gas in
graphene is being transferred to phonons fast. The
time constant for the energy transfer from the
electrons to acoustic phonons in graphene is on the
order of pico-seconds [16-18]. From the other side,
our measurement time was small compared to
hours, which are required in order to induce
substantial damage to graphene [19].
Figure 1: Schematic of the first measurement of the
thermal conductivity of graphene.
The long graphene flakes for these measurements
were produced by the standard technique of
mechanical exfoliation of bulk Kish and highly
3 Copyright © 2010 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) [3,4]. The
trenches were fabricated using the reactive ion
etching. The width of these trenches ranged from 1
µm to 5 µm with the nominal depth of 300 nm. In
the first set of measurements we selected
graphene flakes of approximately rectangular
shape connected to large graphitic pieces, which
acted as heat sinks. The rectangular shape was
selected in order to use a simple data extraction
procedure based on the one-dimensional heat
diffusion equation. These graphitic pieces were at a
distance of few micrometers from the trench edges
to ensure that the transport is at least partially
diffusive and the phonon mean free path (MFP) is
not limited just by the length of the flake. In the later
measurements we utilized well defined massive
metal heat sinks and elaborate procedure for the
thermal conductivity extraction based on the
numerical solution of the heat diffusion equation.
The single layer graphene flakes were selected
using the micro Raman spectroscopy by checking
the intensity ratio of G and 2D peaks and by 2D
band deconvolution [12-15].
The challenge in the measurement of the thermal
conductivity with the described optical technique is
in accurate determining of the power absorbed in
graphene. Only fraction PG of the laser light
focused on graphene flake will actually be
dissipated in the graphene. Most of the light will be
reflected back after the light travels through the
flake to the trench bottom and reflected back. The
power, which is measured by the detector placed at
the position of the flake, is the total power PD, part
of which goes into the graphene flake after two
transmissions and the rest is lost in the silicon
wafer PSi. It is now known that the fraction of the
power absorbed by graphene is 2.3% per layer for
light wavelength λ > 500 nm. Our measurements
were performed at smaller wavelength (λ =488 nm)
where the absorption is enhanced [20,21]. Thus, it
was important to determine the absorbed power in
the specific conditions of our experiment. The
power PG has been measured through the
calibration procedure with the bulk graphite serving
 as a reference. It is based on comparison of the
experimentally determined integrated Raman
intensity for G peak from the single layer graphene
and bulk graphite [6]. With the calibration procedure
in place for converting PD to PG, the measurement
of the thermal conductivity of suspended graphene
reduces to measuring the Raman shift ωG as the
function of the heating power PD determined by the
detector. The measured slope ω/PD, ratio of the
integrated intensities  and the temperature
coefficient  G give the value of the thermal
conductivity of graphene. It has been found that the
near room temperature (RT) thermal conductivity of
the single layer suspended graphene is in the
range from ~3000 W/mK to 5300 W/mK depending
on the size (width and length) of the graphene
flakes. The values obtained for graphene are very
high as compared to other carbon materials [23-
28].
THEORETICAL THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY OF
GRAPHENE:
These high values of the thermal conductivity of
“free” graphene can be explained through rigorous
calculations [9]. The phonon dispersion for all
polarizations and crystallographic directions in
graphene lattice was obtained using VFF method.
The three-phonon Umklapp processes were treated
accounting for all phonon relaxation channels
allowed by the momentum and energy conservation
laws. The phonon scattering on defects and
graphene edges have been also included in the
model. The calculations were performed for a
mode-dependent Gruneisen parameter taken from
the ab initio theory and a range of values from
experiments. It was found that the near RT thermal
conductivity of single layer graphene, calculated
with a realistic Gruneisen parameter, is in the range
~ 2000–5000 W/mK depending on the defect
concentration and roughness of the edges [9].
4 Copyright © 2010 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
The obtained theoretical results were in excellent
agreement with our mesurements.
Despite the success of this numerical approach one
needs a simple model, which would elucidate the
difference between graphene and bulk graphite and
can be used to get quick estimates for graphene
flakes of different size. Here we follow Klemens
approach [27,28] to explain why the thermal
conductivity of graphene can be larger than that of
bulk graphite. We modify the model by introducing
two Gruneisen parameters s obtained
independently for each of the heat conducting
phonon polarization branches s, as well as
separate phonon velocities and cut-off frequencies
for each phonon branch. The effective parameters
 s are computed by averaging the phonon mode-
dependent  s ( q ) for all relevant phonons (here q
is the phonon wave vector). The phonon branches,
which carry heat, are longitudinal acoustic (LA) and
transverse acoustic (TA). The out-of-plane
transverse acoustic phonons (ZA) do not make
contributions to heat conduction due to their low
group velocity and high  s ( q ) .
There is a clear difference in the heat transport in
basal planes of bulk graphite and in single layer
graphene as discussed by Klemens [27,28]. In the
former the heat transport is approximately two-
dimensional only till some low-bound cut-off
frequency C . Below C there appears strong
coupling with the cross-plane phonon modes and
heat starts to propagate in all directions, which
reduces the contributions of these low-energy
modes to heat transport along basal planes to
negligible. In bulk graphite there is a physically
reasonable reference point for the on-set of the
cross-plane coupling, which is the ZO' phonon
branch near ~4 THz observed in the spectrum of
bulk graphite. The presence of ZO' branch and
corresponding C allows one to avoid the
logarithmic divergence in the Umklapp-limited
 thermal conductivity integral and calculate it without Plugging Eq. (1) to Eq. (2) and integrating one
considering other scattering mechanisms. The obtains
physics of heat conduction is principally different in
graphene where the phonon transport is pure two-
dimensional all the way to zero phonon frequency M s ,maxs 2

 (q  0)  0 . There is no on-set of the cross-plane KU  

4 Th s TA, LA  s2
F (s ,min , s ,max ) , (3)
heat transport at the long-wavelength limit in the
system, which consists of only one atomic plane.
with
This is no ZO' branch in the phonon dispersion of
graphene. Thus, the cut-off frequency for Umklapp
s ,max / kBT
processes can not be introduced by analogy with exp( )
bulk graphite.
F (s ,min , s ,max )  
s ,min / kBT

[exp( )  1]2
d 
(4)
Following Refs. [27,28] we introduce an expression  
[ln{exp( )  1}    ] | ss ,max
/k T
B

for the three-phonon Umklapp scattering but use 1  exp( ) ,min / k BT

separate life-times for LA and TA phonons

1 Ms 2 s ,max Here,    / k BT , and the upper cut-off

 UK,s  (1)
 s2 kBT  2 frequencies  s ,max are defined from the actual
phonon dispersion in graphene [9]. The low-bound
cut-off frequencies  s ,min for each s are determined
from the condition that the phonon MFP cannot
where s=TA, LA,  s is the average phonon
exceed the physical size L of the flake, i.e.
velocity for a given branch, T is the absolute
temperature, kB is the Boltzmann constant,  s ,max is
the maximum cut-off frequency for a given branch
and M is the mass of an atom. To determine  s we s Ms s ,max
s ,min  (5)
averaged  s ( q ) obtained from the accurate phonon s k BT L
dispersion calculated using VFF method [9] and ab
initio theory [33]. Substituting this life-time to the
standard expression for the thermal conductivity
one can obtain the following formula for the intrinsic The above equations reduce to Klemens’ formula
thermal conductivity of graphene for graphene [28] in the limit   0 and an
additional assumption of the same  s and  s for
d (q) 2 K exp[  (q) / kT ]
q max
1
KU    {[ s (q) dqs ] U ,s (q) [exp[ s (qs ) / kT ] 1]2 q}dq
4 kBT h s TA, LA qmin
2 LA and TA phonons. We calculated the Umklapp-
(2) limited intrinsic thermal conductivity of graphene as
the function of the flake size L. In Fig. 2 the data is
presented for the averaged values of the Gruneisen
The above equation can be used to calculate the
thermal conductivity with the actual dependence of parameters  LA =1.8 and  TA =0.75 obtained from
the phonon frequency s ( q ) and the phonon [34] and sets of close values to illustrate the
sensitivity to the Gruneisen parameters. An
velocity ds (q) / dq on the phonon wave number.

5 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 experimental data point after Balandin et al. [5,6] is
also shown.
One can see that the intrinsic thermal conductivity
of graphene grows with the increasing linear size of
the graphene flake. This is manifestation of the 2-
D-nature of the phonon transport in graphene. In
the experimental conductions, the thermal
conductivity will also be limited by extrinsic factors
(defects, impurities and grain size), which prevent
the indefinite growth of the thermal conductivity for
very large flakes.
One can notice that the thermal conductivity values
for carbon materials span a huge range from some
of the lowest (~0.6 W/mK for DLCH) to the highest
(~3000 – 5000 W/mK for graphene). Another
observation is a wide data scatter for the reported
values for CNTs. The conventionally accepted
values for CNTs are ~ 3000 – 3500 W/mK. Thus,
graphene can outperform CNTs as the heat
conductor. Owing to its planar geometry, graphene
may have potential for the lateral heat spreading. It
still remains unclear though how the thermal
conductivity of graphene will be affected when it is
embedded inside a device structure or used a
multi-layer coating. The theoretical models
described in this review can be incorporated into
the simulation software for analysis of heat
conduction in graphene layers and graphene
devices [39] and help to answer the question of
feasibility of the thermal management applications.

TABLE I: THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY OF CARBON

MATERIALS

Sample K (W/mK) Comments Reference

graphene ~ 3080 – single layer Balandin et al,

5300 Ghosh et al. [5,6]

MW-CNT > 3000 individual Kim et al. [23]

SW-CNT ~ 3500 individual Pop et al. [24]

Figure 2: Calculated and measured thermal
conductivity of graphene flakes. SW-CNT 1750 – 5800 bundles Hone et al. [25]

SW-CNT > 3000 individual Yu et al. [26]

It is interesting to compare the thermal conductivity
of graphene with that of other carbon materials. graphite ~ 2000 in-plane Klemens [27,28]

Table I summarizes the thermal conductivities of

DLCH ~ 0.6 - 0.7 H: ~20-35% Shamsa et al. [35]
graphene, single-wall carbon nanotubes (SW-
CNTs), multi-wall carbon nanotubes (MW-CNTs), NCD ~ 16 grain size: 22 nm Liu et al. [36]
as well as bulk carbon materials and thin films. The
data on NCD, UNCD, ta-C and hydrogenated UNCD ~ 6 - 17 grain size: < 26 nm Shamsa et al. [38]

diamond-like carbon (DLCH) is based on the

ta-C 1.4 sp3 : ~ 60% Balandin et al. [37]
experimental results obtained by some of us using
the standard “3-omega” and “hot-disk” techniques
[35-38].

6 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
This work was supported, in part, by DARPA –
SRC through the FCRP Center on Functional
Engineered Nano Architectonics (FENA) and
Interconnect Focus Center (IFC).
REFERENCES:
1. Tien, C. L., and Chen, G., 1994, “Challenges in
Microscale Conductive and Radiative Heat
Transfer,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 116, pp. 799–
807.
2. Chen, G., 2004, “Nanoscale Heat Transfer and
Nanostructured Thermoelectrics,” 2004 Inter
Society Conference on Thermal Phenomena, pp.
8–17.
3. Novoselov, K. S., Geim, A. K., Morozov ,S. V.,
Jiang, D., Zhang, Y., Dubonos , S. V., Grigorieva,
I. V., and Firsov, A. A., 2004, “Electric Field Effect
in Atomically Thin Carbon Films,” Science, 306, pp.
666-669.
4. Zhang, Y. B., Tan, Y. W., Stormer, H. L., and
Kim, P., 2005, “Experimental Observation of the
Quantum Hall Effect and Berry's Phase in
Graphene,” Nature, 438, pp. 201-204.
5. Balandin, A. A., Ghosh, S., Bao, W., Calizo, I.,
Teweldebrhan, D., Miao, F., and Lau, C. N., 2008,
“Superior Thermal Conductivity of Single-Layer
Graphene,” Nano Letters, 8, pp. 902-907.
6. Ghosh, S., Calizo, I.,Teweldebrhan, D.,
Pokatilov, E. P., Nika, D. L., Balandinl, A. A., Bao,
W., Miao, F., and Lau, C. N., 2008, “Extremely High
Thermal Conductivity of Graphene: Prospects for
Thermal Management Applications in
Nanoelectronic Circuits,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 92,
pp.151911(1-3).
7. Calizo, I., Miao, F., Bao, W., Lau, C. N., and
Balandin, A. A., 2007, “Variable Temperature
Raman Microscopy as a Nanometrology Tool for
Graphene Layers and Graphene-based Devices,”
Appl. Phys. Lett., 91, pp.071913 (1-3).
8. Calizo, I., Balandin, A. A., Bao, W., Miao, F., and
Lau, C. N., 2007, “Temperature Dependence of the
Raman Spectra of Graphene and Graphene
Multilayers,” Nano Letters, 7, pp.2645-2649.
9. Nika, D. L., Pokatilov, E. P. , Askerov A. S., and
Balandin A. A., 2009. “Phonon Thermal Conduction
in Graphene: Role of Umklapp and Edge
7 Copyright © 2010 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Roughness Scattering,” Phys. Rev. B., 79,
pp.155413 (1-12).
10. Jiang, J. W., Wang, J. S., and Li., B., 2009,
“Thermal Conductance of Graphene and Dimerite,”
Phys. Rev. B., 79, pp.205418 (1-6).
11. Lan, J., Wang , J. S., Gan , C. K., and Chin , S.
K., 2009, “Edge Effects on Quantum Thermal
Transport in Graphene Nanoribbons: Tight-binding
Calculations,” Phys. Rev. B., 79, pp.115401(1-5).
12. Ferrari, A. C., Meyer, J. C., Scardaci, V.,
Casiraghi C., Lazzeri, M., Mauri , F., Piscanec, S.,
Jiang ,D., Novoselov, K. S., Roth, S., and Geim A.
K., 2006, “Raman Spectrum of Graphene and
Graphene Layers,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 97,
pp.187401(1-4).
13. Calizo, I., Bao, W., Miao , F., Lau , C. N., and
Balandin , A. A., 2007, “The Effect of Substrates on
the Raman Spectrum of Graphene: Graphene- on-
Sapphire and Graphene-on-Glass,” Appl. Phys.
Lett., 91, pp.201904 (1-3).
14. Calizo, I., Teweldebrhan, D., Bao, W., Miao , F.,
Lau, C. N., and Balandin, A. A., 2008,
“Spectroscopic Raman Nanometrology of
Graphene and Graphene Multilayers on Arbitrary
Substrates,” J. Physics C, 109 pp.012008 (1-4).
15. Parvizi, F., Teweldebrhan, D., Ghosh, S.,
Calizo, I., Balandin, A. A., Zhu, H., and Abbaschian,
R, 2008, “Properties of Graphene produced by the
High Pressure–High Temperature Growth
Process,” Micro & Nano Lett., 3, pp.29-34.
16. Dawlaty, J. M., Shivaraman, S.,
Chandrashekhar, M., Rana, F., and Spencer, M.
G., 2008, “Measurement of Ultrafast Carrier
Dynamics in Epitaxial Graphene,” Appl. Phys. Lett.,
92, pp. 042116 (1-3).
17. Sun, D., Wu , Z-K., Divin, C., Li , X., Berger, C.,
de Heer, W. A., First, P. N., and Norris, T. B., 2008,
“Ultrafast Relaxation of Excited Dirac Fermions in
Epitaxial Graphene using Optical Differential
Transmission Spectroscopy,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 101,
pp.157402 (1-4).
18. Bolotin, K. I., Sikes, K. J., Hone, J., Stormer, H.
L., Kim, P., 2008, “Temperature-dependent
Transport in Suspended Graphene,” Phys. Rev.
Lett., 101, pp.096802 (1-4).
19. Krauss, B., Lohmann, T., Chae, D-H., Haluska,
M., Klitzing, K-V., and Smet, J. H., 2009. “Laser-
induced Disassembly of a Graphene Single Crystal
into a Nanocrystalline Network,” Phys. Rev. B, 79,
pp.165428 (1-9).
20. 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 34. Nika, D. L., Ghosh, S., Pokatilov, E. P., and
Constant Defines Visual Transparency of Balandin ,A. A., 2009. “Lattice Thermal Conductivity
Graphene,” Science, 320, pp.1308. of Graphene Flakes: Comparison with Bulk
21. Kim, K. S., Zhao, Y., Jang, H., Lee, S. Y., Kim, Graphite,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 94, pp. 203103 (1-3).
J. M., Kim, K. S., Ahn, J-H., Kim, P., Choi, J-Y., and 35. Shamsa, M., Liu, W. L., Balandin, A. A.,
Hong, B. H., 2009, “Large-scale Pattern Growth of Casiraghi, C., Milne, W. I., and Ferrari, A. C., 2006,
Graphene Films for Stretchable Transparent “Thermal Conductivity of Diamond-like Carbon
Electrodes,” Nature, 457, pp.706-710. Films,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 89, pp.161921 (1-3).
22. Mak, K. F., Sfeir, M. Y.,Wu, Y.,Lui, C. H., 36. Liu, W. L., Shamsa, M., Calizo, I., Balandin, A.
Misewich, J. A., and Heinz, T. F., 2008, A., Ralchenko, V., Popovich, A., and Saveliev, A.,
“Measurement of the Optical Conductivity of 2006, “Thermal Conduction in Nanocrystalline
Graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 101, pp.196405 (1-4). Diamond Films: Effects of the Grain Boundary
23. Kim, P., Shi, L., Majumdar, A., and McEuen, P. Scattering and Nitrogen Doping,” Appl. Phys. Lett.,
L., 2001, “Thermal Transport Measurements of 89, pp. 171915 (1-3).
Individual Multiwalled Nanotubes,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 37. Balandin, A. A., Shamsa, M., Liu, W. L.,
87, pp.215502 (1-4). Casiraghi, C., and Ferrari, A. C., 2008, “Thermal
24. Pop, E., Mann, D., Wang, Q., Goodson, K., and Conductivity of Ultrathin Tetrahedral Amorphous
Dai, H., 2006, “Thermal Conductance of an Carbon Films,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 93, pp.043115 (1-
Individual Single-Wall Carbon Nanotube above 3).
Room Temperature,” Nano Letters, 6, pp.96-100. 38. Shamsa, M., Ghosh, S., Calizo, I., Ralchenko,
25. Hone, J., Whitney, M., Piskoti, C., and Zett, A., V., Popovich, A., and Balandin, A. A., 2008,
1999, “Thermal Conductivity of Single-walled “Thermal Conductivity of Nitrogenated
Carbon Nanotubes,” Phys. Rev. B, 59, pp. R2514- Ultrananocrystalline Diamond Films on Silicon,” J.
R2516. Appl. Phys., 103, pp.083538 (1-8).
26. Yu, C. H., Shi, L., Yao, Z.,Li, D. Y., and 39. Subrina, S and Kotchekov, D., 2008,
Majumdar, A., 2005, “Thermal Conductance and “Simulation of Heat Conduction in Suspended
Thermopower of an Individual Single-wall Carbon Graphene Flakes of Variable Shapes,” J.
Nanotube,” Nano Letters, 5, pp.1842-1846.
Nanoelectronics and Optoelectronics, 3, pp. 249-
27. Klemens, P. G., 2000, “Theory of the a-plane
Thermal Conductivity of graphite,” J. Wide Bandgap 269.
Materials, 7, pp.332-339.
28. Klemens, P. G., 2001, “Theory of Thermal
Conduction in Thin Ceramic Films,” Int. J.
Thermophysics, 22, pp. 265-275.
29. Srivastava, G. P., 1990, “The Physics of
Phonons,” Philadelphia:IOP, pp. 99. Bhandari, C.
M. and D. M. Rowe. 1988. “Thermal Conduction in
Semiconductors,” New York:Wiley.
30. Klemens, P. G., 1958,“Solid State Physics,” F.
Seitz and D. Turnbull, eds. New York:Academic, 7,
pp.1.
31. Han, Y-J. and Klemens, P. G., 1993,
“Anharmonic Thermal Resistivity of Dielectric
Crystals at Low Temperatures,” Phys. Rev. B, 48,
pp.6033-6042.
32. Ziman, J. M., 2001., “Electrons and Phonons,”
Oxford:Clarendon Press, pp. 463.
33. Mounet, N. andMarzari, N., 2005, “First-
Principles Determination of the Structural,
Vibrational and Thermodynamic Properties of
Diamond, Graphite, and Derivatives,” Phys. Rev.
B, 71, pp. 205214 (1-14).

8 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/10/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms