Arxiv:2012.08007V2 [Cond-Mat.Mtrl-Sci] 24 Mar 2021 Friction Between Van Der Waals Layers to Calculate the En- to Phyllosilicates in the Lithosphere [6–8]

Ripplocations in Layered Materials: Sublinear Scaling and Basal Climb

James G. McHugh,∗ Pavlos Mouratidis, and Kenny Jolley Dept. of Chemistry, Loughborough University Epinal Way, Loughborough LE11 3TU, United Kingdom (Dated: March 26, 2021) The ripplocation is a crystallographic defect which is unique to layered materials, combining nanoscale delamination with the crystallographic slip of a basal dislocation. Here, we have studied basal dislocations and ripplocations, in single and multiple van der Waals layers, using analytical and computational techniques. Expressions for the energetic and structural scaling factors of surface ripplocations are derived, which are in close correspondence to the physics of a classical carpet ruck. Our simulations demonstrate that the lowest-energy structure of dislocation pile-ups in layered materials is the ripplocation, while large dislocation pile-ups in bulk graphite demonstrate multilayer delamination, curvature and voids. This can provide a concise explanation for the large volumetric expansion seen in irradiated graphite.

Introduction. — It has long been understood that the which can substantially modify the physical properties of plastic deformation of solids proceeds primarily through adsorbed monolayers. [10–13] the nucleation of linear defects, called dislocations, which Ripplocations occur both epitaxially and in the bulk of locally accommodate crystallographic slip. The slipped layered materials. In the context of irradiated graphite, and unslipped crystal regions on either side of a disloca- the bulk ripplocation or ”ruck and tuck” mechanism of tion line are related through translation by a lattice vec- dislocation pile-up represents the first proposal of de- tor, which is a topological property of that dislocation, formation due to delamination in the bulk of layered called its Burgers vector, b. The dynamics of disloca- solids, and is likely to be particularly important in ex- tions are dominated by Frank’s rule, which dictates that plaining many of the properties of dimensional change the energy of a dislocation is quadratic in the Burgers in highly-irradiated highly oriented pyrolytic graphite vector, E ∝ b2. This causes perfect dislocations to dis- (HOPG) samples. However, while this type of bulk rip- sociate into partials, with Burgers vector of less than a plocation has been found in experimental TEM images full lattice translation [1? , 2]. of irradiated graphite [7, 14–19], it is a relatively rare Recently, distinct behaviour has been observed in lay- defect. Distinct behaviour, including delamination and ered materials. Surface ripples with well-defined crystal- buckling spread across many layers and two-dimensional lographic character comprising sharp, localised folds be- kink band networks [20, 21], has also been observed. This tween regions which are slipped relative to one another motivates further, systematic studies of multi-layer and by an in-plane lattice vector have been observed at the two-dimensional dislocation configurations. (0001) surface of exfoliated MoS2 samples and graphite In contrast to the classical dislocation, ripplocations nanoplatelets [3, 4]. These defects combine the prop- exhibit a sublinear energy scaling as a function of Burg- erties of edge dislocations and delamination, and have ers vector, E ∝ bβ, where β < 1. This ensures that been termed ripplocations. Extensive spherical nanoin- ripplocations comprised of multiple Burgers vector be- dentation experiments have demonstrated that the defor- come increasingly energetically favourable as a function β β β mation behaviour of a wide variety of layered materials of extra material, as |b1+b2| < |b1| +|b2| . While this proceeds not through the basal dislocation, but through sublinearity has been well-established, there is reasonable a distinct and reversible mechanism, which has been at- variation in the literature with reported values lying in tributed to the formation of ripplocations [5]. Reversible the range β ≈ 0.3 − 0.45 [3, 22, 23]. Additionally, while arrays of ripplocation boundaries which can evolve into there have been computational studies of ripplocations, kink bands under increasing damage are believed to con- no rigorous comparison has been made between them and stitute the initial states of material failure in layered ma- the corresponding dislocation cores. terials. Ripplocations are now believed to occur on a vari- In this work, we have applied analytical and computa- ety of length scales, accounting for material deformation tional techniques which accurately model the interlayer in substances as diverse as playing cards and steel sheets arXiv:2012.08007v2 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci] 24 Mar 2021 friction between van der Waals layers to calculate the en- to phyllosilicates in the lithosphere [6–8]. Additionally, ergetic and structural scaling factors of single- and multi- surface wrinkles on homogeneous substrates necessarily layer surface and bulk ripplocations. In van der Waals have edge dislocation character below a critical length materials the interlayer friction is encapsulated in the [9], hence the study of ripplocations will also give fur- γ-surface energy to slide adjacent layers along different ther insight into the wrinkling behaviour of 2D materials, crystallographic directions [24–27]. This is essential in accurately modelling these defects, as it is the resistance to sliding against adjacent layers that stabilises basal dislocations & ripplocations. Our simulations of dislocation ∗ [email protected] pile-ups in large systems demonstrate that the locally 2

a) 2.50 b) 2.0 c) 2.0 0.65 0.63 0.64 Gr (E∝n0.41) hBN (E∝n0.37) MoS (E∝n0.38) Gr (w∝n0.27) hBN (w∝n0.26) Gr-Cu (w∝n0.29) Gr (h∝n ) hBN (h∝n ) Gr-Cu (h∝n ) 2.25 2 2.00 1.5 1.5 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.0 1.0 [eV/A] f 1.00 E Width [nm] 0.75 Height [nm] 0.5 0.5 0.50 0.25 0.00 0.0 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 n [extra units of material] n [extra units of material] n [extra units of material] d) AB AB

] height length + n, n = 1,2,3,4 � 𝟐𝟐 𝟎𝟎

𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏 thickness width [

[ ]

FIG. 1.𝟏𝟏�𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏 (a) Formation energy of ripplocations in epitaxial graphene, MoS2 and hBN sheets vs amount of additional material n. (b) Width and (c) Height of ripplocations on epitaxial graphene on graphene, hBN on hBN and graphene on the Cu(100) surface (d) Schematic depiction of ripplocation conﬁgurations and associated structural properties as they have been calculated in this work.

buckled ripplocation structure is the preferred mode of crystallographic orientation. Atoms in the top layer are deformation with increasing additional material in the allowed to fully relax, while the bottom layer is held fixed pile-up. by setting all forces to zero, to approximate a compressed monolayer on a substrate. This approach has been veri- Methods. — Density Functional Theory (DFT) calcu- fied in comparison to a fully-relaxed, multilayer graphite lations have been performed using plane-wave basis Kohn substrate using MD calculations, which produces very Sham states as implemented in the Quantum Espresso similar qualitative behaviour, with a small quantitative package [28, 29]. We have employed Vanderbilt ultra- difference which we attribute to relaxation of the multi- soft pseudopotentials parameterised according to the Lo- layer substrate (for more details see Fig. S3-S4). cal Density Approximation (LDA). While it is often as- The amount of additional material is quantified using sumed that the inclusion of gradient terms in the Gen- the parameter n, denoting a Burgers vector of multiple eralised Gradient Approximation (GGA) makes it a bet- lattice translations. Along the zigzag direction this cor- ter approximation than the simpler LDA, in some cases responds to an edge dislocation (n = 1) or superdislo- LDA performs significantly better than GGA. Notably, cation (n > 1), b = n × [1210]. Along the armchair the LDA provides a more accurate approximation to the zz direction b = n × [1100], and all edge dislocations are interlayer van der Waals interaction in comparison to the ac superdislocations. Thus, n quantifies the number of edge GGA [30], when benchmarked against higher levels of dislocations in the superdislocation pile-up, and is the theory such as Quantum Monte Carlo (QMC) calcula- characteristic property of a ripplocation defect. tion. [31, 32] Electronic wave-functions were expanded DFT structural relaxations have been performed for in a plane-wave basis with cut-offs of Ecut = 40 Ry.A Γ-centred 1 × 5 × 1 k-point grid is found to sample the zigzag surface ripplocations, b = n × [1210] in graphene, Brillouin zone with sufficient accuracy, giving total en- hexagonal boron nitride (hBN) and MoS2. While the ergy convergence to within 0.1 meV/atom for all struc- initial configuration is that of a superdislocation, with tures. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations have been a well-defined Burgers vector, upon relaxation the large performed in LAMMPS [33], using the hybrid neural net- initial in-plane strains are released by out of plane buck- work (hNN) potential for multilayer graphene systems ling. This gives close to equilibrium bond lengths across developed by Wen and Tadmor [34]. We have taken care the ripplocation (see Fig. S5-S6), and prior work has to assess the suitability of the hNN potential and a vari- suggested that ripplocations do not possess a long range ety of interlayer potentials in capturing the behaviour of Burgers vector [3, 22]. dislocations and ripplocations (for additional details see Formation energies Ef have been calculated from the Fig. S1-S2). optimised supercells as:

Surface ripplocations. — Surface ripplocations have Ef = Ecell − NBL, (1) been created through the insertion of additional rows of material to the top monolayer of a bilayer structure in where Ecell is the energy of a defected bilayer, BL is a periodic ribbon geometry, which is extended along one the energy per atom of a perfect bilayer, and N is the 3

β(α) δ(α) γ(α) Method αbestfit E ∝ b h ∝ b w ∝ b Gravity 1.0 5/7 4/7 1/7 Gr (DFT) 0.191 0.401 [0.415] 0.588 [0.646] 0.210 [0.292] HBN (DFT) 0.139 0.388 [0.393] 0.629 [0.651] 0.197 [0.303] MoS2 (DFT) 0.127 0.378 [0.388] 0.610 [0.652] 0.287 [0.305] KC (MD) 0.173 0.402 [0.408] 0.623 [0.647] 0.187 [0.295] DRIP (MD) 0.197 0.411 [0.418] 0.617 [0.645] 0.226 [0.291] LP (MD) 0.170 0.382 [0.406] 0.549 [0.648] 0.109 [0.296] hNN (MD) 0.098 0.382 [0.413] 0.679 [0.646] 0.223 [0.293] hNN t = 2 0.111 0.408 [0.381] 0.759 [0.654] 0.271 [0.309] hNN t = 3 0.133 0.391 [0.391] 0.736 [0.674] 0.287 [0.304] hNN t = 4 0.127 0.388 [0.388] 0.765 [0.674] 0.305 [0.306]

TABLE I. Energy, width, and height scalings of surface ripplocations from different computational methods. Corresponding values for the best-fit value of the sublinearity factor α are shown in square brackets. number of atoms. The height has been calculated as the to gain more detailed insight into the energetics and dy- distance between the flat part of the top layer and the namics of ripplocations, we now compare the correspond- ripple’s peak, while the width was taken as the FWHM, ing properties of basal dislocations. The basal dislocation both of which are shown schematically in Fig. 1(d). The core in graphite and other layered materials is wide (>10 formation energy as a function of n is shown in Fig. 1(a) nm) [35–37] due to the weak interlayer interactions, and for all three materials, where we observe the expected therefore difficult to simulate via DFT [38, 39]. sublinear dependence on b, with similar scaling factors To circumvent this, we have conducted MD simulations in the range β ≈ 0.37 − 0.41. of large cells of up to 500 nm in length. In conducting MD simulations of interlayer defects in layered materials, it is

0.9 1.9 of is crucial importance to capture the interlayer friction hNN[height] or γ-surface energy. We have therefore taken particular 0.8 1.8 AIREBO[height] 1.7 care in comparing a variety of the available MD potentials 0.7 1.6 to our DFT calculations. All of the potentials we consider 0.6 agree qualitatively with our DFT results for the γ-surface 1.5 0.5 energy [25, 27, 38, 40], as they are all ﬁtted to quantum 1.4 mechanical calculations of this property.

0.4 1.3

Height [nm] Height 0.3 1.2 To further validate these potentials and compare to our DFT results, we have performed relaxation of sur- 0.2 1.1 face ripplocations for increasing n, along both armchair 0.1 1.0 hNN and zigzag directions. Our results for the energetic and [energy] 0.9 0.0 AIREBO[energy] structural scaling factors using the hNN potential are 0.8 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 consistent with DFT, as are all of the other potentials Length [nm] which produce a significant interlayer friction energy. (for more details see Fig S9-S11). A full comparison of the FIG. 2. Formation energy and height of the n = 1 surface scaling factors for all of the interlayer potentials consid- ripplocation using the AIREBO and hNN potentials. ered, as well as the DFT results is shown in Table 1. We note that all of the computational methods predict Similarly, sublinear scaling is observed in the height highly sublinear energy scaling in agreement with DFT, and width, with consistent values for ripplocations in all and are generally within a relatively small range of values three materials, as shown in Fig. 1(b) and Fig. 1(c). despite differences in choice of material, level of theory Further simulations of a graphene wrinkle on the Cu(100) and computational method. Furthermore, simulation of surface (for additional details see Fig. S7-S8) produces multilayer (i.e. finite thickness, as shown schematically nearly identical structural scaling factors, which is highly in Fig. 1 (d)) ripplocations, undertaken using the hNN suggestive that similar physics underlies both types of potential also predict similar sublinear scaling factors. ripples. In contrast, potentials which do not correctly capture Basal Dislocations — The sublinear energy scaling the γ-surface energy, are not able to correctly capture guarantees that ripplocations will eventually become ripplocation properties with increasing cell size. For ex- lower in energy than the corresponding dislocation struc- ample, while the AIREBO potential is commonly used in tures, and that with increasing Burgers vector, the dislo- studies of graphene and graphite, the γ-surface energy is cation core will eventually buckle and release its strain in significantly underestimated in comparison to DFT. This the out of plane direction. However, the precise transi- has immediate implications for the epitaxial properties of tion point between these two defects is unclear. In order surface ripplocations. In particular, we find that this po- 4

a) 2.5 c) 3.2 Zigzag Edge 2.8 2.0 Screw 2.4

2.0 1.5 1.6 [eV/Å] f

1.0 AC E 1.2

Disregistry [Å] Disregistry 0.8 0.5 Dislocation array AB AB 0.4 Ripplocation 0.0 0.0 Super-dislocation 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Length [nm] n [extra units of material] AB 600 0 3.2 AC -60 AB d) Armchair b) 2.8

2.4

2.0

1.6 [eV/Å] f

E 1.2

0.8 Dislocation array 0.4 Ripplocation Super-dislocation 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 n [extra units of material]

FIG. 3. (a) Disregistry calculated normal to the dislocation line (Edge) component and along the line (Screw) vs length of bilayer and (b) cell conﬁguration and local stacking in a dislocated bilayer with two oppositely signed partial mixed dislocations (c) Comparison of superdislocation, dislocation array and ripplocation energies for Burgers vectors along to the zigzag and (d) armchair directions.

√ tential does not give consistent results (see Fig. 2). With tials√ and a pair of√ edge partials,√ bac = n ×√ 3[1010] = increasing cell length, the ripple height decreases signifi- n×( 3/6[1100]+ 3/6[0110]+ 3/3[1010]+ 3/3[1010]), cantly, and for cells above approximately 55 nm ripploca- and ripplocations are preferred for n > 1. Overall, at tions are not formed. Instead, the ripplocation ruck slides relatively small Burgers vector we observe the onset of into the adjacent layers in a completely incommensurate rippling and buckling in preference to in-plane strain ac- manner (i.e., without forming basal dislocations). commodation for both crystallographic directions. This Having verified the validity of our computational meth- behaviour is again consistent with that of a ruck in a clas- ods, we now compare the properties of ripplocations sical inextensible material, where under an initial com- to the corresponding dislocation and super-dislocation pression, a sheet will not buckle unless the ratio of the ini- cores. The structures considered have an identical Burg- tial compression to the coefficient of static friction of the ers vector, i.e. amount of extra material, in the core substrate interaction, here encapsulated in the γ-surface, region but are constrained to remain flat and the two is above a critical value [41]. defects are therefore directly comparable. Fig. 3(c) and Scaling relations. — The near universality of the ob- Fig. 3(d) compare the energy of ripplocations vs the served scaling law warrants further consideration. In corresponding superdislocation cores as a function of n, prior work, the energetic and structural scaling factors calculated using the hNN potential. It can be seen that for a ruck under the influence of gravity have been calcu- at small n for Burgers vector along both crystallographic lated. [41, 42]. Taking into account our prior observation directions, the lowest-energy structures are not localised that the bond strain across a surface ruck is generally ripples, but rather arrays of partial dislocations with net very low (Fig S5-S6), it is valid to consider a surface rip- Burgers vector equal to the initial superdislocation Burg- plocation as just such a ruck in an inextensible material. ers vector, as shown in Fig. 3(a) and Fig. 3(b). It is therefore noteworthy that our computational values For the zigzag core this gives pairs of ±600 partials, are quite different from these classical scalings (see Table b = n × 1/3[1210] = n × (1/3[1100] + 1/3[0110]) for zz 1), particularly for the height and energy. n < 3, above which ripplocations are nucleated in preference to dislocation arrays. Along the armchair direc- We therefore revisit and modify these scalings, by con- tion, the initial n = 1 superdislocation dissociates into a sidering two energetic contributions to the core energy sequence of four partial dislocations, a pair of ±300 par- [3, 41, 42]. We emphasise that inextensibility is an im- 5 portant condition in the following derivation, as it implies der Waals interaction, which scales as a function of dis- that the membrane force [43] across the ruck is small, tance as r−6, here incorporated approximately through which allows us to ignore the contribution of strain to the the sublinearity factor α. This leads to the fact that ma- ripple formation energy. This has been explicitly verified terial closer to the substrate matters proportionally much by calculating the strain contribution for the hNN model, more than that which is further away, so that the overall which we find to be approximately 0.1 eV and crucially energy scales very slowly in the maximum height. is nearly constant as a function of n. The total energy of Notably, our calculations indicate very similar scaling a ripplocation ruck is then taken to be factors across all materials and approximations. For example, our calculations indicate that the interlayer adhe- E(w) = U (w) + U (w) = Bκ2w + V thαw. (2) e s sion energy factor V of MoS2 is around 50% higher than that of graphene, yet the calculated scalings remain in a The relevant energy terms comprise the elastic energy very similar range, indicating that it is indeed the short- U and the adhesion energy U , which is the energy ac- e s ranged behaviour of the interlayer interaction which de- quired from the shifting and out of plane deformation termines ruck properties, rather than the magnitude of across a ripple. The elastic energy is taken simply as the adhesion energy. U = Bκ2w where B is the elastic bending energy, w is e Thus, if the introduction of a sublinear term is the width and κ is the net curvature across a ripple. The an accurate model of the rippling across a ruck in interfacial term encapsulates the adhesion energy across a two-dimensional monolayer, all three properties the core, which we take to be V thαw where V is the will be consistently inter-related through a common interlayer adhesion energy of the absorbed layer to the sublinearity factor. Table 1 shows the calculated substrate, h is the height of the ruck and t is the mono- scaling of energy, height and width for ripplocations layer thickness. in different materials and using different methods, The most important modification of this expression as well as a ”best fit” value of α. This value min- with respect to the classical equation for an inextensi- imises the difference, , between the analytical and ble ruck is the incorporation of the sublinearity factor α, computational values for all three scalings, = which accounts for the deviation from classical behaviour p(β − β )2 + (δ − δ )2 + (γ − γ )2. for van der Waals layers. We note that when α = 1 fit comp fit comp fit comp The analytical expression produces extremely good this corresponds to the classical rucking of a sheet un- agreement with the computational sublinear energy der the influence of gravity. Making use of the relations √ dependence, with small errors in the height and width h = bw and κ = h for the arc-length and curvature of w2 in the range of 0.05 − 0.1. We attribute this small a clamped elastica, the energy can be expressed as a func- departure from the ideal behaviour for the structural tion of width only, E(w) = Bbw−2 + V tbα/2w1+α/2. We √ properties to the violation of the h = bw assumption then solve for the equilibrium width by considering the for our van der Waals systems (see Fig. S12) derivative of the energy equation, Eq. (2) with respect to the defect width, Overall, our calculations confirm that all three scalings are indeed closely related.Additionally, since we dE(w) 2Bb have only considered the bending and adhesion energies, = − + (1 + α/2)V t(bw)α/2 = 0. (3) dw w3 this scaling behaviour is immediately applicable to ph- ysisorbed monolayers on other substrates, this explains This immediately leads to analytical forms for the scaling why our DFT simulation of the graphene/Cu(100) sur- γ(α) δ(α) of ruck height and width as w(b) ∝ b and h(b) ∝ b , face interaction produces scalings which agree closely to with the ripplocation results in Fig. 1(b) and 1(c). 2 − α Bulk. — We now discuss the behaviour of bulk ripplo- γ(α) = , (4) 6 + α cations in large MD cells. Cells containing bulk ripplocations are created similarly to surface ripplocations, where and extra rows of material are inserted into a monolayer in a 1 2 − α bulk cell. For small n, this again gives dislocation arrays δ(α) = + . (5) and a linear energy dependence. Above a critical value 2 12 + 2α of n, the formation energy is almost constant with addi- Replacing the height and width for these expressions tional material as shown in Fig. 4(a), and the folded-over in Eq. 2, the ruck energy as a function of width is then bulk ripplocation, or ”ruck & tuck” structure is nucleated 2+α [44]. Accurate γ-surface energy is again paramount in E(w) = (B + tV )A(α) 6+α b1−(4−2α)/(6+α), where A(α) = 2B , hence leading to a sublinear energy scaling attaining accurate defect structure, which for bulk rip- tV (1+α/2) plocations is reflected in the surrounding sheets, which 4 − 2α have the lowest-energy Bernal stacking (see Fig. 4c-d), β(α) = 1 − . (6) from which we conclude that slip of the folded defect into 6 + α the surrounding layer is inhibited due to friction. The sublinear scaling as a function of height can be un- The constant formation energy can be understood with derstood as a consequence of the shorter range of the van reference to the relaxed structures, shown in Fig. 4(a). 6

a) n = 3 n = 4 n = 5 b) 5.0 4.5 Prismatic climb 4.0 3.5 Dislocation 3.0 2.5 [eV/Å] f

E 2.0 n = 6 n = 7 n = 8 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 n [extra units of material] c) AB n = 5 AB d) AB n = 6 AB

FIG. 4. (a) Single-layer pileup in bulk graphite for diﬀerent values of n, resulting in the ”ruck and tuck” structure with increasing material, (b) bulk ripplocation formation energy vs n, (c) and (d) plan view above a ruck and tuck defect, demonstrating that Bernal stacking is recovered in the material surrounding the folded defect core.

As extra material is added, it is accommodated by in- ever, the presence of both the ruck and tuck defect as creasing the length of the prismatic sheet bounded by well as large-scale bending can be taken as evidence for the highly curved regions, while the curved regions re- dislocation pile-up as the deformation mode of irradiated main approximately the same. This demonstrates that HOPG. Furthermore, all of the bulk structures simulated for both bulk and surface ripples, curvature can essen- in this work essentially demonstrate basal climb, i.e., c- tially be seen as the mechanism of dislocation climb for axis expansion to release in-plane compression resulting basal dislocations in layered materials. This proceeds from many basal dislocations. unconstrained on the surface, while in bulk additional Two-dimensional ripples. — MD simulations also per- material is accommodated simply by growing the flat, mit calculations of other large structures which are pro- perfectly-stacked prismatic layer. hibitive for DFT, such as the two-dimensional ripploca- Dislocation pile-ups on multiple adjacent layers in bulk tion junction shown in Fig. 6. This has been created by graphite have also been considered through the incorpo- inserting material along both the armchair and zigzag di- ration of extra material to a number of adjacent layers in rections on the surface of a bilayer cell. The pictured cell, a large bulk simulation cell. These structures are the cor- which has an initial Burgers vector b = (bac, bzz) = (2, 1), responding bulk defect to the finite-thickness surface rip- results in the formation of a ripplocation junction, where plocations. Upon relaxation we find structures which are perpendicular dislocation lines meet at an AA-stacked quite distinct from the single-layer ruck and tuck, which dislocation node. It is noteworthy that this type of struc- are more similar to bulk twin boundaries [45], demon- ture is strikingly similar to experimental transmission strating multilayer curvature and the formation of voids electron microscopy (TEM) images of irradiated HOPG adjacent to the compressed region, some representative surfaces [20, 21], and in this context our large-scale structures of which are shown in Fig. 5(a). The dis- simulations again provide evidence of dislocation pile- tinction between the single and multilayer defects can be up as the likely deformation mode of irradiated HOPG. understood through consideration of the bending energy We leave further, systematic investigation of these two- for multilayer graphene, which scales linearly for small dimensional defects to future work. thicknesses [46] Discussion. — The application of classical mechanics The formation energy per Burgers vector per layer for to the nanoscale buckling of two-dimensional monolayers these defects is shown in Fig. 6(b), which we see results has typically proven difficult. In this work, we have found in even lower energy per n than the single-layer ruck and that minor modification of classical expressions gives ex- tuck. The ruck and tuck can then be seen as a limit- ceptional agreement to DFT calculations. The energy ing case where compression occurs on only one layer. It scaling, Eq. 2, is based only on classical expressions for is therefore unsurprising that the structure of irradiated clamped elastica and is, therefore, directly applicable to HOPG generally involves larger-scale curvature, as the any inextensible layered material, through simple modi- higher bending energy inhibits the ruck and tuck for the fication of the α sublinearity parameter. This reinforces lower-energy, finite thickness bulk ripplocations. How- the idea that ripplocations are a general concept applica- 7 a) b) 4.0 t = 1 3.5 t = 5 t = 10 3.0 t = 15

2.5

n = 4, t = 5 n = 4, t = 10 2.0 [eV/Å/t] f

E 1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 n = 4, t = 15 n = 5, t = 10 n [extra units of material]

FIG. 5. (a) Multilayer (finite thickness, t), dislocation pile-ups (b) Energy per length of additional material of multilayer dislocation pile-ups. ble at a variety of length-scales, since we have considered In all cases, buckling of the ripplocation can be seen only monolayer bending and adhesion. as a type of climb mechanism for basal dislocations. Our work therefore has important implications for the The exceptionally low sublinear factors, in the range irradiation-induced deformation of HOPG. Under irradi- α ≈ 0.1 − 0.18, in comparison to a sheet under the influ- ation, HOPG and even single graphene sheets will shrink, ence of gravity, helps to explain the exaggerated tendency which very quickly leads to the formation of basal dislo- of epitaxial monolayers to wrinkle and ripple. Our work cations. The very low Peierls barrier in layered materi- therefore indicates that the most important property in als ensures that the basal dislocation core is very diffuse the wrinkling of epitaxially-grown monolayers is the co- and easy to move, which readily allows dislocation pile- efficient of friction between the monolayer and the sub- ups [39, 44]. Under this compression, our work confirms strate. This can explain, for example, the high density of that these dislocation pile-ups will result in delaminated, wrinkle formation in graphene adsorbed on the the highly curved regions of microstrucure rather than flat superdis- incommensurate Cu(100) and Cu(110) surfaces [47] in location cores. This suggests that essentially a process comparison to the almost-commensurate Cu(111) face. It of sub-surface wrinkling is implicated in the pronounced is therefore noteworthy that the ripplocation formation c-axis expansion of irradiated HOPG samples, with in- energy is close to the observed experimental energy bar- creasing compression resulting in the formation of rip- rier for wrinkle nucleation on Ir(100) substrates. [48, 49] plocation arrays, voids, ruck and tucks and highly curved regions. It is then unsurprising that there are substantial similarities between our simulations and experiment. AB AB Under heavy ion bombardment, in-plane dislocations are nucleated, which evolve into rippled ”kink boundaries”. These two-dimensional dislocations complexes are almost identical to our simulations of surface ripplocation arrays, Fig. 6. There is also substantial experimental evidence for the formation of the single-layer ruck & tuck in irradiated graphite, [7, 14–19]. In addition, our multilayer simulations are similar to the regions of curvature and voids, which have recently been found in irradiated HOPG [50], again demonstrating damage due to compression and pile-up. In sum, this correspondence implicates the compression-induced dislocation pile-up and rippling of graphene monolayers as a concise and appealing expla- AB AB nation of the irradiation-induced deformation of single crystal graphite. FIG. 6. wo-dimensional ripplocation junction on the Graphite Acknowledgments — JGM was supported by the UK (0001) surface. Carbon atoms are colour-coded according to EPSRC grant EP/R005745/1. KJ and PM gratefully height. Blue sections are flat AB stacked regions. The ripples acknowledge funding from EDF Energy. The authors ac- height is around 1 nm, red sections. knowledge the use of the HPCMidlands+ facility, funded 8

by EPSRC grant EP/P020232/1.

[1] F. C. Frank and W. T. Read. Multiplication processes highly oriented pyrolytic graphite by x-ray diffraction for slow moving dislocations. Physical Review, 79(4):722– and electron microscopy. Journal of Applied Crystallog- 723, August 1950. raphy, 38(2):361–367, March 2005. [2] F.C. Frank. LXXXIII. crystal dislocations.—elementary [15] J. Eapen, R. Krishna, T. D. Burchell, and K. L. Murty. concepts and definitions. The London, Edinburgh, and Early damage mechanisms in nuclear grade graphite un- Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, der irradiation. Materials Research Letters, 2(1):43–50, 42(331):809–819, August 1951. November 2013. [3] Akihiro Kushima, Xiaofeng Qian, Peng Zhao, Sulin [16] S. Muto and T. Tanabe. Fragmentation of graphite Zhang, and Ju Li. Ripplocations in van der waals layers. crystals by electron irradiation at elevated temperatures. Nano Letters, 15(2):1302–1308, January 2015. Journal of Electron Microscopy, 48(5):519–523, January [4] A.V. Alaferdov, R. Savu, M.A. Canesqui, Y.V. Kopele- 1999. vich, R.R. da Silva, N.N. Rozhkova, D.A. Pavlov, Yu.V. [17] Steve Johns, Lingfeng He, Karen Bustillo, William E. Usov, G.M. de Trindade, and S.A. Moshkalev. Ripploca- Windes, Rick Ubic, and Chinnathambi Karthik. tion in graphite nanoplatelets during sonication assisted Fullerene-like defects in high-temperature neutron- liquid phase exfoliation. Carbon, 129:826–829, April irradiated nuclear graphite. Carbon, 166:113–122, 2018. September 2020. [5] M.W. Barsoum and G.J. Tucker. Deformation of lay- [18] Steve Johns, Lingfeng He, Joshua J. Kane, William E. ered solids: Ripplocations not basal dislocations. Scripta Windes, Rick Ubic, and Chinnathambi Karthik. Exper- Materialia, 139:166–172, October 2017. imental evidence for ‘buckle, ruck and tuck’ in neutron [6] Joe Aslin, Elisabetta Mariani, Karl Dawson, and irradiated graphite. Carbon, 159:119–121, April 2020. Michel W. Barsoum. Ripplocations provide a new mech- [19] C.-T. Pan, J. A. Hinks, Q. M. Ramasse, G. Greaves, anism for the deformation of phyllosilicates in the litho- U. Bangert, S. E. Donnelly, and S. J. Haigh. In-situ sphere. Nature Communications, 10(1), February 2019. observation and atomic resolution imaging of the ion ir- [7] Michel W. Barsoum. Ripplocations: A progress report. radiation induced amorphisation of graphene. Scientific Frontiers in Materials, 7:146, May 2020. Reports, 4(1), October 2014. [8] M. W. Barsoum, X. Zhao, S. Shanazarov, A. Romanchuk, [20] J.A. Hinks, S.J. Haigh, G. Greaves, F. Sweeney, C.T. S. Koumlis, S. J. Pagano, L. Lamberson, and G. J. Pan, R.J. Young, and S.E. Donnelly. Dynamic mi- Tucker. Ripplocations: A universal deformation mech- crostructural evolution of graphite under displacing ir- anism in layered solids. Physical Review Materials, 3(1), radiation. Carbon, 68:273–284, March 2014. January 2019. [21] Jonathan A. Hinks, G. Greaves, Sarah J. Haigh, Cheng- [9] Fangyuan Zheng, Quoc Huy Thi, Lok Wing Wong, Qing- Ta Pan, and Stephen E. Donnelly. Kink band formation ming Deng, Thuc Hue Ly, and Jiong Zhao. Critical sta- in graphite under ion irradiation at 100 and 298 k. MA- ble length in wrinkles of two-dimensional materials. ACS TERIALS TRANSACTIONS, 55(3):447–450, 2014. Nano, 14(2):2137–2144, January 2020. [22] Jacob Gruber, Andrew C. Lang, Justin Griggs, Mitra L. [10] You-Shin No, Ji Hye Lee, Bae Ho Park, and Jin Sik Choi. Taheri, Garritt J. Tucker, and Michel W. Barsoum. Ev- Ripples, wrinkles, and crumples in folded graphene. Jour- idence for bulk ripplocations in layered solids. Scientific nal of the Korean Physical Society, 76(11):985–990, June Reports, 6(1), September 2016. 2020. [23] Alireza Ostadhossein, Ali Rahnamoun, Yuanxi Wang, [11] Manoj Tripathi, Frank Lee, Antonios Michail, Dim- Peng Zhao, Sulin Zhang, Vincent H. Crespi, and Adri itris Anestopoulos, James G. McHugh, Sean P. Ogilvie, C. T. van Duin. ReaxFF reactive force-field study of Matthew J. Large, Aline Amorim Graf, Peter J. Lynch, molybdenum disulfide (MoS2). The Journal of Physical John Parthenios, Konstantinos Papagelis, Soumyabrata Chemistry Letters, 8(3):631–640, January 2017. Roy, M. A. S. R. Saadi, Muhammad M. Rahman, [24] Shuyang Dai, Yang Xiang, and David J. Srolovitz. Struc- Nicola Maria Pugno, Alice A. K. King, Pulickel M. ture and energetics of interlayer dislocations in bilayer Ajayan, and Alan B. Dalton. Structural defects modulate graphene. Physical Review B, 93(8), February 2016. electronic and nanomechanical properties of 2d materials. [25] Aleksey N. Kolmogorov and Vincent H. Crespi. Registry- ACS Nano, 15(2):2520–2531, January 2021. dependent interlayer potential for graphitic systems. [12] Wenjuan Zhu, Tony Low, Vasili Perebeinos, Ageeth A. Physical Review B, 71(23), June 2005. Bol, Yu Zhu, Hugen Yan, Jerry Tersoff, and Phaedon [26] Andrey M. Popov, Irina V. Lebedeva, Andrey A. Knizh- Avouris. Structure and electronic transport in graphene nik, Yurii E. Lozovik, and Boris V. Potapkin. Molecu- wrinkles. Nano Letters, 12(7):3431–3436, June 2012. lar dynamics simulation of the self-retracting motion of [13] Shikai Deng and Vikas Berry. Wrinkled, rippled and a graphene flake. Physical Review B, 84(24), December crumpled graphene: an overview of formation mecha- 2011. nism, electronic properties, and applications. Materials [27] Mingjian Wen, Stephen Carr, Shiang Fang, Efthimios Today, 19(4):197–212, May 2016. Kaxiras, and Ellad B. Tadmor. Dihedral-angle-corrected [14] Anjana Asthana, Yoshio Matsui, Makoto Yasuda, Koji registry-dependent interlayer potential for multilayer Kimoto, Tadao Iwata, and Ken ichi Ohshima. Investiga- graphene structures. Physical Review B, 98(23), Decem- tions on the structural disordering of neutron-irradiated ber 2018. 9

[28] Paolo Giannozzi, Stefano Baroni, Nicola Bonini, Mat- Popov, and Andrey A. Knizhnik. Dislocations in stacking teo Calandra, Roberto Car, Carlo Cavazzoni, Davide and commensurate-incommensurate phase transition in Ceresoli, Guido L Chiarotti, Matteo Cococcioni, Ismaila bilayer graphene and hexagonal boron nitride. Physical Dabo, Andrea Dal Corso, Stefano de Gironcoli, Ste- Review B, 93(23), June 2016. fano Fabris, Guido Fratesi, Ralph Gebauer, Uwe Ger- [39] Rob H. Telling and Malcolm I. Heggie. Stacking fault and stmann, Christos Gougoussis, Anton Kokalj, Michele dislocation glide on the basal plane of graphite. Philo- Lazzeri, Layla Martin-Samos, Nicola Marzari, Francesco sophical Magazine Letters, 83(7):411–421, July 2003. Mauri, Riccardo Mazzarello, Stefano Paolini, Alfredo [40] Mingjian Wen and Ellad B. Tadmor. Hybrid neural net- Pasquarello, Lorenzo Paulatto, Carlo Sbraccia, Sandro work potential for multilayer graphene. Physical Review Scandolo, Gabriele Sclauzero, Ari P Seitsonen, Alexander B, 100(19), November 2019. Smogunov, Paolo Umari, and Renata M Wentzcovitch. [41] Dominic Vella, Arezki Boudaoud, and Mokhtar Adda- QUANTUM ESPRESSO: a modular and open-source Bedia. Statics and inertial dynamics of a ruck in a rug. software project for quantum simulations of materials. Physical Review Letters, 103(17), October 2009. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 21(39):395502, [42] John M. Kolinski, Pascale Aussillous, and L. Mahadevan. September 2009. Shape and motion of a ruck in a rug. Physical Review [29] P Giannozzi, O Andreussi, T Brumme, O Bunau, Letters, 103(17), October 2009. M Buongiorno Nardelli, M Calandra, R Car, C Cavaz- [43] Qiang Lu, Marino Arroyo, and Rui Huang. Elastic bend- zoni, D Ceresoli, M Cococcioni, N Colonna, I Carnimeo, ing modulus of monolayer graphene. Journal of Physics A Dal Corso, S de Gironcoli, P Delugas, R A DiStasio, D: Applied Physics, 42(10):102002, April 2009. A Ferretti, A Floris, G Fratesi, G Fugallo, R Gebauer, [44] M.I. Heggie, I. Suarez-Martinez, C. Davidson, and U Gerstmann, F Giustino, T Gorni, J Jia, M Kawamura, G. Haffenden. Buckle, ruck and tuck: A proposed new H-Y Ko, A Kokalj, E Kü¸cükbenli, M Lazzeri, M Marsili, model for the response of graphite to neutron irradiation. N Marzari, F Mauri, N L Nguyen, H-V Nguyen, A Otero Journal of Nuclear Materials, 413(3):150–155, June 2011. de-la Roza, L Paulatto, S Poncé,D Rocca, R Sabatini, [45] A. P. Rooney, Z. Li, W. Zhao, A. Gholinia, A. Kozikov, B Santra, M Schlipf, A P Seitsonen, A Smogunov, I Tim- G. Auton, F. Ding, R. V. Gorbachev, R. J. Young, and rov, T Thonhauser, P Umari, N Vast, X Wu, and S Ba- S. J. Haigh. Anomalous twin boundaries in two dimen- roni. Advanced capabilities for materials modelling with sional materials. Nature Communications, 9(1), Septem- quantum ESPRESSO. Journal of Physics: Condensed ber 2018. Matter, 29(46):465901, October 2017. [46] Edmund Han, Jaehyung Yu, Emil Annevelink, Jangyup [30] Kevin F. Garrity, Joseph W. Bennett, Karin M. Rabe, Son, Dongyun A. Kang, Kenji Watanabe, Takashi and David Vanderbilt. Pseudopotentials for high- Taniguchi, Elif Ertekin, Pinshane Y. Huang, and throughput DFT calculations. Computational Materials Arend M. van der Zande. Ultrasoft slip-mediated bending Science, 81:446–452, January 2014. in few-layer graphene. Nature Materials, 19(3):305–309, [31] Maziar Nekovee, W. M. C. Foulkes, and R. J. Needs. November 2019. Quantum monte carlo investigations of density functional [47] Bing Deng, Zhenqian Pang, Shulin Chen, Xin Li, Caixia theory of the strongly inhomogeneous electron gas. Phys- Meng, Jiayu Li, Mengxi Liu, Juanxia Wu, Yue Qi, Wen- ical Review B, 68(23), December 2003. hui Dang, Hao Yang, Yanfeng Zhang, Jin Zhang, Ning [32] E. Mostaani, N. D. Drummond, and V. I. Fal’ko. Quan- Kang, Hongqi Xu, Qiang Fu, Xiaohui Qiu, Peng Gao, tum monte carlo calculation of the binding energy of Yujie Wei, Zhongfan Liu, and Hailin Peng. Wrinkle-free bilayer graphene. Physical Review Letters, 115(11), single-crystal graphene wafer grown on strain-engineered September 2015. substrates. ACS Nano, 11(12):12337–12345, December [33] Steve Plimpton. Fast parallel algorithms for short-range 2017. molecular dynamics. Journal of Computational Physics, [48] Hichem Hattab, Alpha T. N’Diaye, Dirk Wall, Claudius 117(1):1–19, March 1995. Klein, Giriraj Jnawali, Johann Coraux, Carsten Busse, [34] E. B. Tadmor, R. S. Elliott, J. P. Sethna, R. E. Miller, Raoul van Gastel, Bene Poelsema, Thomas Michely, and C. A. Becker. The potential of atomistic simulations Frank-J. Meyer zu Heringdorf, and Michael Horn von and the knowledgebase of interatomic models. JOM, Hoegen. Interplay of wrinkles, strain, and lattice param- 63(7):17–17, July 2011. eter in graphene on iridium. Nano Letters, 12(2):678–682, [35] J. S. Alden, A. W. Tsen, P. Y. Huang, R. Hov- January 2012. den, L. Brown, J. Park, D. A. Muller, and P. L. [49] Alpha T N'Diaye, Raoul van Gastel, Antonio J Mart´ınez- McEuen. Strain solitons and topological defects in bi- Galera, Johann Coraux, Hichem Hattab, Dirk Wall, layer graphene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Frank-J Meyer zu Heringdorf, Michael Horn von Hoe- Sciences, 110(28):11256–11260, June 2013. gen, JoséM Gómez-Rodr´ıguez, Bene Poelsema, Carsten [36] Junhao Lin, Wenjing Fang, Wu Zhou, Andrew R. Lupini, Busse, and Thomas Michely. In situobservation of stress Juan Carlos Idrobo, Jing Kong, Stephen J. Pennycook, relaxation in epitaxial graphene. New Journal of Physics, and Sokrates T. Pantelides. AC/AB stacking boundaries 11(11):113056, November 2009. in bilayer graphene. Nano Letters, 13(7):3262–3268, June [50] Steve Johns, Tyler Poulsen, Joshua J. Kane, William E. 2013. Windes, Rick Ubic, and Chinnathambi Karthik. Forma- [37] Benjamin Butz, Christian Dolle, Florian Niekiel, Kon- tion of carbon nanostructures in nuclear graphite under stantin Weber, Daniel Waldmann, Heiko B. Weber, high-temperature in situ electron-irradiation. Carbon, Bernd Meyer, and Erdmann Spiecker. Dislocations in 143:908–914, March 2019. bilayer graphene. Nature, 505(7484):533–537, December [51] Levente Tapasztó, Traian Dumitric˘a, Sung Jin Kim, 2013. Péter Nemes-Incze, Chanyong Hwang, and László P. [38] Irina V. Lebedeva, Alexander V. Lebedev, Andrey M. Biró.Breakdown of continuum mechanics for nanometre- 10

wavelength rippling of graphene. Nature Physics, International Publishing, 2018. 8(10):739–742, August 2012. [54] One-dimensional dislocations. i. static theory. Proceed- [52] Wenzhong Bao, Feng Miao, Zhen Chen, Hang Zhang, ings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathe- Wanyoung Jang, Chris Dames, and Chun Ning Lau. matical and Physical Sciences, 198(1053):205–216, Au- Controlled ripple texturing of suspended graphene and gust 1949. ultrathin graphite membranes. Nature Nanotechnology, [55] Ryan S. Elliott and Ellad B. Tadmor. Knowledgebase of 4(9):562–566, July 2009. interatomic models (kim) application programming in- [53] Oded Hod. Interlayer interactions in low-dimensional lay- terface (api), 2011. ered hetero-structures: Modeling and applications. In Handbook of Materials Modeling, pages 1–25. Springer