1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Thermoelectric power in carbon nanotubes and quantum wires of nonlinear optical, optoelectronic, and related materials under strong magnetic field: Simplified theory and relative comparison
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.2827365
/content/aip/journal/jap/103/3/10.1063/1.2827365
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/103/3/10.1063/1.2827365

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

(a) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the generalized proposed band model with , (b) the generalized band model with , (c) the simplified three-band model of Kane, where, and , (d) the two-band model of Kane, and (e) the parabolic energy bands. (b) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the generalized proposed band model with , (b) the generalized band model with , (c) the simplified three-band model of Kane, where and , (d) the two-band model of Kane, and (e) the parabolic energy bands. (c) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the generalized proposed band model with , (b) the generalized band model with , (c) the three-band model of Kane, where and , (d) the two-band model of Kane, and (e) the parabolic energy bands. The curves (f) and (g) exhibit the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively. (d) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the generalized proposed band model with , (b) the generalized band model with , (c) the three-band model of Kane, where and , (d) the two-band model of Kane, and (e) the parabolic energy bands. The curves (f) and (g) exhibit the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(a) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. (b) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. (c) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. (d) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. (e) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of lattice matched to InP in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

(a) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. The curves (d) and (e) are the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs. (b) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. The curves (d) and (e) exhibit the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively. (c) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. The curves (d) and (e) exhibit the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively. (d) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. The curves (d) and (e) exhibit the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively. (e) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of lattice matched to InP in accordance with (a) the three-band model of Kane, (b) the two-band model of Kane, and (c) the parabolic energy bands. The curves (d) and (e) exhibit the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

(a) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of CdS in accordance with the Hopfield model where (a) and (b) . The curves (c), (d), and (e) exhibit the TPM for the QWs of , PbSnTe, and , respectively. (b) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of CdS in accordance with the Hopfield model where (a) and (b) . The curves (c), (d), and (e) exhibit the TPM for QWs of , PbSnTe, and . The curves (f) and (g) exhibit the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

(a) Plot of the TPM as a function of film thickness for the QWs of stressed InSb in accordance with (a) the absence of stress and (b) the presence of stress. The curves (c), (d), and (e) exhibit the TPM for QWs of , , and , respectively. (b) Plot of the TPM as a function of electron concentration per unit length for the QWs of stressed InSb in accordance with (a) the absence of stress and (b) the presence of stress. The curves (c), (d), and (e) exhibit the TPM in QWs of , , and , respectively. The curves (f) and (g) are the corresponding plots for (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

(a) Plots of the TPM as a function of film thickness for QWs of Bi in accordance with (a) the McClure and Choi model, (b) the Hybrid model, (c) the Cohen model, (d) the Lax model, and (e) the parabolic ellipsoidal model. (b) Plots of the TPM as a function of for QWs of Bi in accordance with (a) the McClure and Choi model, (b) the Hybrid model, (c) the Cohen model, (d) the Lax model, and (e) the parabolic ellipsoidal. The curves (f) and (g) exhibit the TPM for the (, ) and (, 0) CNTs, respectively.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

The numerical values of the energy band constants of the materials as used in this article.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jap/103/3/10.1063/1.2827365
2008-02-06
2014-04-20
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Thermoelectric power in carbon nanotubes and quantum wires of nonlinear optical, optoelectronic, and related materials under strong magnetic field: Simplified theory and relative comparison
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/103/3/10.1063/1.2827365
10.1063/1.2827365
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM