Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Extreme Thermal Insulation in Nano-Bubble Wrap Materials

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Nano-bubble wrap monolayers can insulate heat better than air or commercial aerogels.

desk verdict New architecture, solid R2D trend, but the below-0.001 W/mK claim depends on an assumed 8.6 nm gap height and is not yet supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.12685 v1 pith:7P6AB2TJ submitted 2025-07-16 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hall

Amalya C. Johnson , Sorren Warkander , Archana Raja , Fang Liu This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.mes-hall
keywords nano-bubblewrapthermalinsulationKnudsenregimetime-domainthermoreflectancevanderWaalsheterostructures2Dmaterialsboundaryresistanceultralowconductivity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that monolayers of van der Waals materials, patterned into periodic nano-bubbles and nano-wrinkles, can act as extreme thermal insulators. Time-domain thermoreflectance measurements give out-of-plane thermal conductivities below 0.001 W·m⁻¹·K⁻¹ at room temperature and atmospheric pressure, nearly an order of magnitude lower than air and commercial aerogels. The insulating effect comes from trapping air in nanoscale gaps deep in the Knudsen regime while atomically thin, weakly coupled layers suppress phonon and interfacial heat flow. If correct, the work establishes a scalable route to thermal metamaterials that beat the classic aerogel limit without vacuum or cryogenic conditions.

What carries the argument

The central object is the nano-bubble wrap: a monolayer van der Waals solid suspended as periodic bubbles or wrinkles over a substrate, enclosing air pockets whose height distribution centers near 8.61 nm. The argument runs through the effective-medium expression κ = (1 − Π)κ_s + Πκ_g, with porosity Π ≈ 99.78%, the Kaganer model for κ_g in a confined gas layer between parallel plates, and a phonon-suppressed κ_s for narrow WSe2 ribbons. Time-domain thermoreflectance supplies the measured constraint: a single-parameter fit treating the whole stack as a lumped interface resistance R2D between the aluminum transducer and the SiO2 substrate. The machinery converts that one resistance into an effective conductivity and then decomposes it into gas, solid, and interfacial contributions.

What would settle it

A cross-sectional transmission electron microscopy image of the aluminum/2D interface after transducer deposition would settle whether the metal contacts the substrate through wrinkle valleys; if substantial direct contact exists, the extracted R2D is inflated. Alternatively, repeating TDTR after exchanging the trapped gas for a heavier noble gas such as krypton or xenon should shift the conductivity in the direction and magnitude predicted by the Kaganer model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a monolayer of WSe2, MoS2, or graphene, when shaped into periodic nanoscale deformations over a substrate, acquires an out-of-plane thermal resistance R2D as high as roughly $10^{4}$ m²·K·GW⁻¹, more than an order of magnitude above previously reported van der Waals heterostructure interfaces. From this resistance the paper derives effective thermal conductivities around 0.001 W·m⁻¹·K⁻¹, below that of air and silica aerogels. The authors attribute the suppression to three combined effects: nanoscale air gaps with a median height near 8.6 nm that place gas conduction deep in the Knudsen regime, monolayer walls whose width is below the phonon mean free path, and weak van der Waals coupling at the top and bottom interfaces. A Kaganer-model estimate of confined-air conduction plus a porosity-weighted solid contribution reproduces the measured total resistance of the WSe2 bubble wrap within uncertainty.

Load-bearing premise

The whole result depends on treating the sample as a flat stack with a uniform air gap of about 8.6 nm; if the metal coating sinks into the wrinkles and touches the substrate, or if the actual air-gap sizes differ from the microscope average, the measured insulation would be overstated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Nano-bubble wraps offer a scalable platform for thermal insulation below the aerogel limit under ambient, atmospheric-pressure conditions.
  • Stacking multiple bubble-wrap layers vertically, using robotic stacking, could extend the effect into three-dimensional insulating architectures.
  • Replacing air with lower-conductivity gases such as krypton or xenon should push gas-phase conduction still lower.
  • Using disordered polycrystalline monolayers could add phonon scattering and further reduce the solid contribution.
  • The periodic strain and suspended regions provide a large-area platform for strain engineering of electronic and optical properties without external strain rigs.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the lumped-resistance model survives a direct interface check, the same geometry should be tunable by template periodicity: tighter periodicities and taller bubbles would deepen the Knudsen suppression and lower κ further, a prediction the paper does not test.
  • The reported values suggest nano-bubble wraps could function as thermal barriers in flexible or ultrathin electronics where aerogel monoliths are too bulky, but only if their in-plane mechanical robustness and long-term gas retention are verified.
  • A natural extension is to measure the same architectures as a function of gas species and pressure; agreement with the Kaganer scaling would confirm that gas confinement, not interface artifacts, carries the record-low conductivity.
  • The approach might be combined with overlapping 2D lattices to tune the interfacial phonon coupling independently of the gas gap.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a scalable fabrication route for periodic nano-wrinkles and nano-bubbles in monolayer 2D materials (MoS2, WSe2, MoSe2, WS2, graphene) and presents time-domain thermoreflectance (TDTR) measurements of the out-of-plane interfacial resistance R2D. Flat monolayers yield R2D values consistent with literature; wrinkled monolayers show up to roughly 100-fold increases; and stacked flat-on-wrinkled 'bubble wrap' samples reach R2D around 10^4 m2 K GW-1. The authors convert R2D into effective thermal conductivities and claim values below 0.001 W m-1 K-1, which they describe as nearly an order of magnitude lower than air and commercial aerogels. They support the interpretation with PL and Raman strain analysis and with a Kaganer-model calculation of gas conduction through nanoscale gaps, obtaining a predicted total resistance of about 5447 m2 K GW-1 for a WSe2 bubble-wrap structure.

Significance. If the claims survive scrutiny, the work is significant: it introduces a materials platform that combines deep-Knudsen gas confinement with weakly coupled van der Waals interfaces, and the flat-versus-wrinkled TDTR trend is internally consistent, with flat-monolayer benchmarks matching literature values. The fabrication approach is scalable, and the PL/Raman data provide independent evidence of periodic strain. However, the headline conductivity below 0.001 W m-1 K-1 rests on a length-scale conversion and morphological assumptions that are not yet established, and the model's own total estimate of about 0.0015 W m-1 K-1 does not reproduce the sub-0.001 statement. The significance is therefore conditional on resolving the technical points below.

major comments (5)
  1. [Thermal Conductivity Measurements] The conversion from the measured interface resistance R2D to the quoted effective thermal conductivity is not defined in the main text, and the value kappa ~ 0.001 W m-1 K-1 depends entirely on choosing the 8.61 nm average air-gap height as the conduction length. Since R2D is a resistance per unit area, the same measured R2D ~ 10^4 m2 K GW-1 gives kappa ~ 0.03 W m-1 K-1 if the relevant length is instead taken as the 300 nm wrinkle period, which is comparable to air and would overturn the central claim. The authors need to justify the effective thermal length with cross-sectional morphology and, preferably, with an independent measurement that is sensitive to the actual conduction path. The abstract's 'below 0.001 W m-1 K-1' is also inconsistent with the model's own total of approximately 0.0015 W m-1 K-1, and this discrepancy should be resolved.
  2. [Methods / TDTR modeling] The TDTR analysis models each sample as a planar Al/2D/SiO2 stack with a single lumped interface resistance, as described in the sentence 'we adapt a similar modeling approach.' For a rough, 10 nm-high wrinkle network, this assumption is not self-evident: if the electron-beam-deposited Al fills the wrinkle valleys or contacts the SiO2 substrate directly, the extracted R2D reflects a different heat-flow path than the assumed air gaps. The manuscript provides no TEM/EDX cross-sections or control experiments showing that the air gaps survive metallization and that the contact fraction matches the AFM average. This issue is load-bearing for the record R2D values and for the claim that gas confinement dominates the measured resistance.
  3. [Modelling paragraph (porosity estimate)] The porosity estimate of Pi ~ 99.78% is computed from the 3.3 A monolayer thickness and the 300 nm wrinkle periodicity, but the periodicity is a lateral spacing, not the out-of-plane thickness of the bubble-wrap layer. With the measured wrinkle height of about 10 nm, the solid volume fraction of two monolayer sheets in a unit cell is on the order of 7%, not 0.22%, which would increase the solid contribution (1 - Pi) kappa_s by roughly an order of magnitude to about 0.015 W m-1 K-1. The porosity entering the model must be defined with respect to the actual gas-gap geometry, and the numerical consequences for the total predicted resistance must be recalculated.
  4. [Model validation] The stated 'excellent agreement' between the model's R ~ 5447 m2 K GW-1 and the measured bubble-wrap values up to 10^4 m2 K GW-1 is difficult to evaluate because the measured distribution, sample count, and the specific WSe2 bubble-wrap data point are not reported in the main text. Moreover, the model uses the same AFM gap-height distribution both to compute the gas conduction and to set the length scale used in the kappa conversion, so the agreement is not a fully independent confirmation. Please report the individual measured R2D values with uncertainties and identify which data points correspond to the WSe2 bubble-wrap structure.
  5. [Thermal Conductivity Measurements (comparison with prior work)] The claim that the measured R2D is 'more than one order of magnitude higher' than previous van der Waals heterostructures such as graphene/MoS2 superlattices or rotationally mismatched TMDC stacks is not accompanied by the numerical values from those references. Since this comparison is central to the record-setting statement, the relevant literature R2D values should be explicitly quoted, and the comparison should be made on the same definition of R2D.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and text] The unit 'W · M-1K-1' should read 'W m-1 K-1'; the same typo appears several times.
  2. [Figure 4] The sentence 'effective thermal conductivities, shown in Figure 4d' appears to refer to the wrong panel; the comparison plot is panel (e), which is not explicitly cited in the text.
  3. [Supplementary Information] The manuscript references Supplementary Figures S1 and S4 and the SI for TDTR fitting details and the Kaganer model, but the SI is not included with this version. Key equations, including the Kaganer gas-conduction expression and the formula used to convert R2D to kappa, should be given in the main text or an accessible SI.
  4. [Acknowledgements and typography] Minor typographical errors include 'Comparision' in the Figure 4 caption, 'constructred' in the Acknowledgements, and 'the the' in the SCGSR sentence.
  5. [Reference [33]] Reference [33] is a commercial engineering website; please replace it with a citable primary or peer-reviewed source for the thermal conductivity of air and aerogels.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the R2D measurement is an independent observable, and the effective conductivity conversion and model agreement rest on stated AFM and literature inputs rather than on recycled outputs.

full rationale

The central thermal claim is built on a measured TDTR interface resistance R2D, which is a genuine experimental observable. The paper states transparently: 'From the measured thermal resistance R2D, we estimate effective thermal conductivities' (Thermal Conductivity Measurements section). Converting an interface resistance to an effective conductivity necessarily requires choosing a length scale; the paper chooses the AFM-measured nanogap distribution centered near 8.61 nm. This is a modeling assumption and a legitimate correctness risk — if the relevant thermal length were instead the full 300 nm periodicity, the same R2D would give κ ≈ 0.03 W·m−1·K−1, comparable to air — but it is not circular: R2D is measured, the gap height is measured by AFM, and the quoted κ is their quotient, not an input reused as an output. The Kaganer-model prediction of R ≈ 5447 m2·K·GW−1 is likewise not fitted to the TDTR data; it is assembled from the AFM gap distribution, a literature value for WSe2 nanoribbon conductivity (ref 9), the calculated porosity, and external boundary-conductance references. The 'excellent agreement' with experiment is therefore an independent consistency check, though its uncertainty is sizable. The only self-citation is ref 19 for gold-tape exfoliation, a fabrication detail that does not carry the thermal argument. There is an internal inconsistency between the abstract's 'below 0.001 W·m−1·K−1' and the main text/model values near 0.001–0.0015 W·m−1·K−1; this is a reporting/consistency issue, not circularity. The paper's own listed limitations (air–monolayer boundary conductance, strain, disorder, curvature, top-surface morphology) are model refinements, not admissions that the derivation reduces to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central thermal-resistance prediction depends on literature gas-conduction models, a simplified effective-medium treatment of the TDTR data, and geometric estimates of gap height and porosity. No new physical entities are introduced. The main unstated element is the Kaganer accommodation coefficient, which may be a hidden free parameter in the SI.

free parameters (1)
  • R2D (interfacial thermal resistance) = up to about 10^4 m2 K/GW for WSe2 bubble wrap
    Extracted from TDTR as the single fitting parameter; the central claim of ultralow k is derived directly from this value and the assumed structure thickness.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Kaganer model for gas conduction between parallel plates describes the air gaps
    Used in the modelling section to estimate k_g of the confined air from the about 8.6 nm gap height.
  • domain assumption The TDTR single-interface effective-medium model applies to the wrinkled monolayer stack
    Adopted in Methods/thermal measurements; standard for flat monolayers but untreated for rough nanostructured morphologies.
  • domain assumption Air pockets are sealed or behave as closed gas layers at ambient pressure with a standard accommodation coefficient
    Required for the Kaganer estimate; the accommodation coefficient is not stated in the main text.
  • domain assumption The solid skeleton conductivity is approximated by the WSe2 nanoribbon value from ref. 9, reduced about 95% from monolayer
    Used to compute the solid contribution (1-Pi)*k_s in the thermal model; relies on prior literature accurate at this scale.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Extreme Thermal Insulation in Nano-Bubble Wrap Materials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7P6AB2TJ

@misc{pith2026250712685,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Extreme Thermal Insulation in Nano-Bubble Wrap Materials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7P6AB2TJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.12685}
}
abstract

Achieving ultra-low thermal conductivity under ambient conditions is a fundamental challenge constrained by classical heat transport limits and material design trade-offs. Here, we introduce a new class of nano-bubble wrap architectures that achieve exceptionally low thermal conductivity by integrating nanoscale gas confinement with atomically thin, weakly coupled van der Waals solids. Using scalable patterning of 2D monolayers into periodic nano-bubbles and nano-wrinkles, we construct materials with structural analogies to macroscopic bubble wrap but engineered at length scales much shorter than the mean free path of air and the mean free path of phonons in the atomically thin monolayers. Time-domain thermoreflectance measurements reveal out-of-plane thermal conductivities nearly an order of magnitude lower than that of air and commercial aerogels, reaching critical values below 0.001 W $\cdot$ M$^{-1}$K$^{-1}$ under room temperature and atmospheric pressure. This extreme thermal resistance arises from the combined suppression of gas-phase conduction, phonon transport, and interfacial coupling. Our findings establish nano-bubble wraps as a versatile platform for tuning heat flow in ultrathin materials and open new pathways for designing thermal metamaterials and energy-efficient technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.12685 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Schematic of the fabrication process for monolayer nano-bubble wrap struc [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Photoluminescence spectra of Flat and NW-MoS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Representative Raman spectra of flat and NW-MoS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Schematic of the TDTR measurement setup. (b) Representative TDTR signals [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A.; Liao, F.; Fan, M

    Fu, Z.; Corker, J.; Papathanasiou, T.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Madyan, O. A.; Liao, F.; Fan, M. Critical review on the thermal conductivity modelling of silica aerogel composites. Journal of Building Engineering 2022, 57, 104814

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Chavannes, M. A. Method for making laminated cushioning material. US Patent 3142599A, 1964

    work page 1964

  3. [3]

    C.; Chen, V.; Chen, S.; Smithe, K

    Sood, A.; Sievers, C.; Shin, Y. C.; Chen, V.; Chen, S.; Smithe, K. K. H.; Chatterjee, S.; Donadio, D.; Goodson, K. E.; Pop, E. Engineering Thermal Transport across Layered Graphene–MoS2 Superlattices. ACS Nano 2021, 15, 19503--19512

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    E.; Pop, E

    Sood, A.; Xiong, F.; Chen, S.; Cheaito, R.; Lian, F.; Asheghi, M.; Cui, Y.; Donadio, D.; Goodson, K. E.; Pop, E. Quasi-Ballistic Thermal Transport Across MoS2 Thin Films. Nano Letters 2019, 19, 2434--2442

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Hong, Y.; Zhang, J.; Zeng, X. C. Thermal Conductivity of Monolayer MoSe _ 2 and MoS _ 2 . The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2016, 120, 26067--26075

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Liu, J.; Choi, G.-M.; Cahill, D. G. Measurement of the anisotropic thermal conductivity of molybdenum disulfide by the time-resolved magneto-optic Kerr effect. Journal of Applied Physics 2014, 116, 233107

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    H.; Jo, I.; Moore, A

    Seol, J. H.; Jo, I.; Moore, A. L.; Lindsay, L.; Aitken, Z. H.; Pettes, M. T.; Li, X.; Yao, Z.; Huang, R.; Broido, D.; Mingo, N.; Ruoff, R. S.; Shi, L. Two-Dimensional Phonon Transport in Supported Graphene. Science 2010, 328, 213--216

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    L.; Cai, W.; Suk, J

    Chen, S.; Moore, A. L.; Cai, W.; Suk, J. W.; An, J.; Mishra, C.; Amos, C.; Magnuson, C. W.; Kang, J.; Shi, L.; Ruoff, R. S. Raman Measurements of Thermal Transport in Suspended Monolayer Graphene of Variable Sizes in Vacuum and Gaseous Environments. ACS Nano 2011, 5, 321--328

    work page 2011

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    First-Principles Determination of Ultralow Thermal Conductivity of monolayer WSe _ 2

    Zhou, W.-X.; Chen, K.-Q. First-Principles Determination of Ultralow Thermal Conductivity of monolayer WSe _ 2 . Scientific Reports 2015, 5, 15070

    2015

  2. [10]

    E.; Mujid, F.; Rai, A.; Eriksson, F.; Suh, J.; Poddar, P.; Ray, A.; Park, C.; Fransson, E.; Zhong, Y.; Muller, D

    Kim, S. E.; Mujid, F.; Rai, A.; Eriksson, F.; Suh, J.; Poddar, P.; Ray, A.; Park, C.; Fransson, E.; Zhong, Y.; Muller, D. A.; Erhart, P.; Cahill, D. G.; Park, J. Extremely anisotropic van der Waals thermal conductors. Nature 2021, 597, 660--665

    2021

  3. [11]

    M.; Suryavanshi, S

    Vaziri, S.; Yalon, E.; Rojo, M. M.; Suryavanshi, S. V.; Zhang, H.; McClellan, C. J.; Bailey, C. S.; Smithe, K. K. H.; Gabourie, A. J.; Chen, V.; Deshmukh, S.; Bendersky, L.; Davydov, A. V.; Pop, E. Ultrahigh thermal isolation across heterogeneously layered two-dimensional mate...

    2019

  4. [12]

    H.; Neumann, M.; Wei, X.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Lee, Y

    Gasparutti, I.; Song, S. H.; Neumann, M.; Wei, X.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Lee, Y. H. How Clean Is Clean? Recipes for van der Waals Heterostructure Cleanliness Assessment. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12, 7701--7709

    2020

  5. [13]

    Construction of Position-Controllable Graphene Bubbles in Liquid Nitrogen with Assistance of Low-Power Laser

    Zhang, X.; Zhang, H.; Cao, S.; Zhang, N.; Jin, B.; Zong, Z.; Li, Z.; Chen, X. Construction of Position-Controllable Graphene Bubbles in Liquid Nitrogen with Assistance of Low-Power Laser. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12, 56260--56268

    2020

  6. [14]

    H.; Moo, J

    An, H.; Tan, B. H.; Moo, J. G. S.; Liu, S.; Pumera, M.; Ohl, C.-D. Graphene Nanobubbles Produced by Water Splitting. Nano Letters 2017, 17, 2833--2838

    2017

  7. [15]

    Stolyarova, E. et al. Observation of Graphene Bubbles and Effective Mass Transport under Graphene Films. Nano Letters 2009, 9, 332--337

    2009

  8. [16]

    C.; Nair, R

    Algara-Siller, G.; Lehtinen, O.; Wang, F. C.; Nair, R. R.; Kaiser, U.; Wu, H. A.; Geim, A. K.; Grigorieva, I. V. Square ice in graphene nanocapillaries. Nature 2015, 519, 443--445

    2015

  9. [17]

    Measuring Interlayer Shear Stress in Bilayer Graphene

    Wang, G.; Dai, Z.; Wang, Y.; Tan, P.; Liu, L.; Xu, Z.; Wei, Y.; Huang, R.; Zhang, Z. Measuring Interlayer Shear Stress in Bilayer Graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 119, 036101

    2017

  10. [18]

    A.; Dai, Z.; Lu, N

    Sanchez, D. A.; Dai, Z.; Lu, N. 2D Material Bubbles: Fabrication, Characterization, and Applications. Trends in Chemistry 2021, 3, 204--217

    2021

  11. [19]

    H.; Li, Q.; Wang, J.; Hone, J.; Zhu, X.-Y

    Liu, F.; Wu, W.; Bai, Y.; Chae, S. H.; Li, Q.; Wang, J.; Hone, J.; Zhu, X.-Y. Disassembling 2D van der Waals crystals into macroscopic monolayers and reassembling into artificial lattices. Science 2020, 367, 903--906

    2020

  12. [20]

    F.; Calado, V

    Schneider, G. F.; Calado, V. E.; Zandbergen, H.; Vandersypen, L. M. K.; Dekker, C. Wedging Transfer of Nanostructures. Nano Letters 2010, 10, 1912--1916

    2010

  13. [21]

    K.; Grigorieva, I

    Khestanova, E.; Guinea, F.; Fumagalli, L.; Geim, A. K.; Grigorieva, I. V. Universal shape and pressure inside bubbles appearing in van der Waals heterostructures. Nature Communications 2016, 7, 12587

    2016

  14. [22]

    Zhu, L.; Zhang, T.; Sun, Z.; Li, J.; Chen, G.; Yang, S. A. Thermal conductivity of biaxial-strained MoS _ 2 : sensitive strain dependence and size-dependent reduction rate. Nanotechnology 2015, 26, 465707

    2015

  15. [23]

    Manipulating the Thermal Conductivity of Monolayer MoS _ 2 via Lattice Defect and Strain Engineering

    Ding, Z.; Pei, Q.-X.; Jiang, J.-W.; Zhang, Y.-W. Manipulating the Thermal Conductivity of Monolayer MoS _ 2 via Lattice Defect and Strain Engineering. J. Phys. Chem. C 2015, 119, 16358--16365

    2015

  16. [24]

    Strain engineering of phonon thermal transport properties in monolayer 2H- MoTe _ 2

    Shafique, A.; Shin, Y.-H. Strain engineering of phonon thermal transport properties in monolayer 2H- MoTe _ 2 . Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2017, 19, 32072--32078

    2017

  17. [25]

    Reduction in thermal conductivity of monolayer MoS _ 2 by large mechanical strains for efficient thermal management

    Liu, J.; Fang, M.; Yang, E.-H.; Zhang, X. Reduction in thermal conductivity of monolayer MoS _ 2 by large mechanical strains for efficient thermal management. Scientific Reports 2025, 15, 1976

    2025

  18. [26]

    J.; Wang, B.; Ziegler, J

    Conley, H. J.; Wang, B.; Ziegler, J. I.; Haglund, R. F. J.; Pantelides, S. T.; Bolotin, K. I. Bandgap Engineering of Strained Monolayer and Bilayer MoS 2. Nano Letters 2013, 13, 3626--3630

    2013

  19. [27]

    Orbital analysis of electronic structure and phonon dispersion in MoS _ 2 , MoSe _ 2 , WS _ 2 , and WSe _ 2 monolayers under strain

    Chang, C.-H.; Fan, X.; Lin, S.-H.; Kuo, J.-L. Orbital analysis of electronic structure and phonon dispersion in MoS _ 2 , MoSe _ 2 , WS _ 2 , and WSe _ 2 monolayers under strain. Phys. Rev. B 2013, 88, 195420

    2013

  20. [28]

    S.; Han, S

    Yun, W. S.; Han, S. W.; Hong, S. C.; Kim, I. G.; Lee, J. D. Thickness and strain effects on electronic structures of transition metal dichalcogenides: 2H-MX _ 2 semiconductors ( M = Mo, W; X = S, Se, Te). Phys. Rev. B 2012, 85, 033305

    2012

  21. [29]

    Castellanos-Gomez, A.; Roldán, R.; Cappelluti, E.; Buscema, M.; Guinea, F.; van der Zant, H. S. J.; Steele, G. A. Local Strain Engineering in Atomically Thin MoS _ 2 . Nano Letters 2013, 13, 5361--5366

    2013

  22. [30]

    K.; Wong, W

    Tan, C. K.; Wong, W. C.; Ng, S. M.; Wong, H. F.; Leung, C. W.; Mak, C. L. Raman studies of MoS _ 2 under strain at different uniaxial directions. Vacuum 2018, 153, 274--276

    2018

  23. [31]

    J.; Zan, R.; Bangert, U.; Wolverson, D.; Georgiou, T.; Jalil, R.; Novoselov, K

    Rice, C.; Young, R. J.; Zan, R.; Bangert, U.; Wolverson, D.; Georgiou, T.; Jalil, R.; Novoselov, K. S. Raman-scattering measurements and first-principles calculations of strain-induced phonon shifts in monolayer MoS _ 2 . Phys. Rev. B 2013, 87, 081307

    2013

  24. [32]

    W.; Cantley, L.; Wadehra, A.; Kim, B

    Lloyd, D.; Liu, X.; Christopher, J. W.; Cantley, L.; Wadehra, A.; Kim, B. L.; Goldberg, B. B.; Swan, A. K.; Bunch, J. S. Band Gap Engineering with Ultralarge Biaxial Strains in Suspended Monolayer MoS _ 2 . Nano Letters 16, 5836--5841

  25. [33]

    Thermal conductivity of common materials - solids, liquids and gases

    Engineeringtoolbox, E. Thermal conductivity of common materials - solids, liquids and gases. https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/thermal-conductivity-d_429.html, Accessed June 2025

    2025

  26. [34]

    C.; Kuhn, J.; Nilsson, O.; Fricke, J.; Pekala, R

    Lu, X.; Arduini-Schuster, M. C.; Kuhn, J.; Nilsson, O.; Fricke, J.; Pekala, R. W. Thermal Conductivity of Monolithic Organic Aerogels. Science 1992, 255, 971--972

    1992

  27. [35]

    G.; Nguyen, N.; Johnson, D.; Bodapati, A.; Keblinski, P.; Zschack, P

    Chiritescu, C.; Cahill, D. G.; Nguyen, N.; Johnson, D.; Bodapati, A.; Keblinski, P.; Zschack, P. Ultralow Thermal Conductivity in Disordered, Layered WSe _ 2 Crystals. Science 2007, 315, 351--353

    2007

  28. [36]

    Tutorial: Time-domain thermoreflectance ( TDTR ) for thermal property characterization of bulk and thin film materials

    Jiang, P.; Qian, X.; Yang, R. Tutorial: Time-domain thermoreflectance ( TDTR ) for thermal property characterization of bulk and thin film materials. Journal of Applied Physics 2018, 124, 161103

    2018

  29. [37]

    Goni, M.; Yang, J.; Schmidt, A. J. Enhanced thermal transport across monolayer MoS 2. 2018, 11, 2173--2180

    2018

  30. [38]

    T.; Sellan, D

    Regner, K. T.; Sellan, D. P.; Su, Z.; Amon, C. H.; McGaughey , A. J.; Malen, J. A. Broadband phonon mean free path contributions to thermal conductivity measured using frequency domain thermoreflectance. Nature Communications 2013, 4, 1640

    2013

  31. [39]

    Thermal Conductivity of Aluminum Alloys—A Review

    Zhang, A.; Li, Y. Thermal Conductivity of Aluminum Alloys—A Review. Materials 2023, 16

    2023

  32. [40]

    J.; Mallard, W

    Linstrom, P. J.; Mallard, W. G. The NIST Chemistry WebBook : A Chemical Data Resource on the Internet. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2001, 46, 1059--1063, Publisher: American Chemical Society

    2001

  33. [41]

    S.; Trofimova, Z

    Bolgar, A. S.; Trofimova, Z. A.; Yanaki, A. A. Thermodynamic properties of tungsten diselenide in a broad temperature range. Soviet Powder Metallurgy and Metal Ceramics 1990, 29, 382--385

    1990

  34. [42]

    K.; Bae, M.-H.; Cahill, D

    Koh, Y. K.; Bae, M.-H.; Cahill, D. G.; Pop, E. Heat Conduction across Monolayer and Few-Layer Graphenes. Nano Letters 2010, 10, 4363--4368

    2010

  35. [43]

    Thermal Boundary Conductance: A Materials Science Perspective

    Monachon, C.; Weber, L.; Dames, C. Thermal Boundary Conductance: A Materials Science Perspective. Annual Review of Materials Research 2016, 46, 433--463

    2016

  36. [44]

    Crystal structures of tungsten disulfide and diselenide

    Schutte, W.; De Boer , J.; Jellinek, F. Crystal structures of tungsten disulfide and diselenide. Journal of Solid State Chemistry 1987, 70, 207--209

    1987

  37. [45]

    Thermal Insulation in Cryogenic Engineering; Israel Program for Scientific Translations, 1969

    Kaganer, M. Thermal Insulation in Cryogenic Engineering; Israel Program for Scientific Translations, 1969

    1969

  38. [46]

    Interfacial Thermal Conductance between Monolayer WSe2 and SiO2 under Consideration of Radiative Electron–Hole Recombination

    Hunter, N.; Azam, N.; Zobeiri, H.; Wang, R.; Mahjouri-Samani, M.; Wang, X. Interfacial Thermal Conductance between Monolayer WSe2 and SiO2 under Consideration of Radiative Electron–Hole Recombination. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12, 51069--51081, PMID: 33108155

    2020

  39. [47]

    J.; Ye, A.; Sung, S

    Mannix, A. J.; Ye, A.; Sung, S. H.; Ray, A.; Mujid, F.; Park, C.; Lee, M.; Kang, J.-H.; Shreiner, R.; High, A. A.; Muller, D. A.; Hovden, R.; Park, J. Robotic four-dimensional pixel assembly of van der Waals solids. Nature Nanotechnology 2022, 17, 361--366

    2022

  40. [48]

    Darlington, T. P. et al. Imaging strain-localized excitons in nanoscale bubbles of monolayer WSe 2 at room temperature. Nature Nanotechnology 2020, 15, 854--860

    2020

  41. [49]

    bubble wrap

    Mennel, L.; Paur, M.; Mueller, T. Second harmonic generation in strained transition metal dichalcogenide monolayers: MoS _ 2 , MoSe _ 2 , WS _ 2 , and WSe _ 2 . APL Photonics 2019, 4, 034404 mcitethebibliography main.tex0000664000000000000000000012135515036032726011237 0ustar ...

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.