The Journal of
the Korean Journal of Metals and Materials

The Journal of
the Korean Journal of Metals and Materials

Monthly
  • pISSN : 1738-8228
  • eISSN : 2288-8241

Editorial Office


  1. 충남대학교 신소재공학과 (Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, 34134, Republic of Korea)
  2. 한국화학연구원 박막재료연구센터 (Thin Film Materials Research Center, Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology, 141 Gajeong-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34114, Republic of Korea)



MoS2, Graphene, Photoelectrochemical, Morphology, Chemical vapor deposition

1. INTRODUCTION

Hydrogen energy has emerged as a highly promising alternative to fossil fuels, and an efficient way to address the environmental crisis and rising energy demand, particularly due to its advantages in storage and transportation. Among the various hydrogen-production technologies, photoelectrochemical (PEC) water splitting, which utilizes sunlight to generate hydrogen, has attracted significant research attention as a sustainable and environmentally friendly method[1, 2]. Conventional PEC materials, such as TiO2, Fe2O3, ZnO, and WO3, have been extensively studied due to their excellent stability[3-6]. However, their wide bandgaps limit visible-light absorption. Although strategies such as doping and heterostructure formation have been explored to overcome this limitation, improvements in PEC efficiency remain limited[7-10]. To fully leverage solar energy, semiconductor materials with an appropriate bandgap for visible-light absorption are essential. Two-dimensional (2D) transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) have attracted considerable attention as next-generation functional materials for applications including solar cells and PEC photoelectrodes because of their favorable optoelectronic properties, high catalytic activity, and suitable bandgap (Eg)[10-14]. In particular, MoS2, a prototypical 2D TMD, has been reported as a viable PEC electrode material due to its high carrier mobility and favorable Eg for visible-light-driven hydrogen generation[15, 16]. The PEC performance of MoS2 can be further enhanced by heterostructure engineering, to facilitate photogenerated electron–hole separation and transfer. In this regard, MoS2/graphene heterostructures exhibit an efficient 2D/2D synergistic effect.

Graphene is particularly attractive as a conductive support layer due to its exceptional electron mobility (~2 × 104 cm2V-1s-1) and its compatibility for forming efficient heterojunctions with 2D TMDs[16, 17]. However, most MoS2/graphene heterostructures are synthesized via wet chemical or mechanical exfoliation methods, which often result in aggregation. This aggregation not only inhibits the ideal formation of nanostructures on graphene but also diminishes electron-transfer properties and catalytic active-site availability due to strong van der Waals and π–π interactions[18, 19]. In contrast, as a promising alternative, vacuum-based fabrication techniques for MoS2/graphene heterostructures enable precise control over MoS2 morphology, facilitating the design of efficient PEC electrodes. Additionally, control of MoS2 morphology and thickness is critical, as both parameters directly influence its surface area and charge transport characteristics. While charge transport in the basal planes of MoS2 is relatively poor, the edge sites exhibit superior catalytic activity and charge carrier dynamics[15]. Therefore, fabricating nanostructured MoS2 with maximized edge-site exposure is desirable for efficient PEC performance[12, 20].

In this study, we demonstrate the morphology-controlled growth of MoS2 on graphene substrates via metal–organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), using deposition time as the primary tuning parameter. The synthesis method preserved the underlying graphene in the resulting MoS2/graphene heterostructures, ranging from thin films to vertically aligned nanosheets, highlighting the capability of this approach for constructing tunable hybrid nanostructures. Comprehensive analyses of MoS2 morphology and thickness were performed, and the optimized MoS2/graphene heterostructure for PEC water-splitting applications was identified.

2. EXPERIMENTAL

2.1. Materials Synthesis

Graphene was synthesized on a Cu foil (Alfa Aesar) using inductively coupled plasma chemical vapor deposition (ICP-CVD) at 950 °C for 5 min, with CH4 and Ar+H2 mixture as reactive gases. The ICP power and chamber pressure were maintained at 200 W and 1 Torr, respectively. The synthesized graphene was subsequently transferred from the Cu foil onto an ITO glass substrate. Detailed descriptions of the CVD growth and transfer processes can be found in a previous study[21]. MoS2 was deposited onto the Graphene/ITO or ITO substrate via metal–organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), using Mo(CO)6 and H2S as the metal precursor and reactive gas, respectively. The growth was carried out at a fixed temperature of 290 °C and a pressure of 1.3 Torr, while varying the deposition time (2, 5, 10, and 30 min). Mo(CO)6 was transported to the reaction zone by Ar carrier gas at a flow rate of 40 standard cubic centimeters per minute (SCCM), and the H2S flow rate was maintained at 60 SCCM throughout the process.

2.2. Material characterization

The morphologies of the fabricated photoelectrodes were analyzed using field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM, S-4800) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM, JEM-ARM200F, JEOL). Structural properties were investigated with micro-Raman spectroscopy (UniThink Inc., UR1207J). The chemical identification of samples was performed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS; K-alpha, Thermo Scientific). Optical characteristics were evaluated using a UV–vis spectrophotometer (Shimadzu UV-2600) and a photoluminescence (PL) spectrometer equipped with a 532 nm excitation laser. The photoexcited carrier behavior was evaluated by time-resolved photoluminescence (TRPL) measurements using a 467 nm pulsed laser, with a transient signal recorded using a time-correlated single-photon spectrometer (Fluorolog 3, Horiba Scientific). The photoelectrochemical (PEC) performance of the samples was assessed using a three-electrode electrochemical workstation (potentiostat/galvanostat, 263A). A saturated calomel electrode (Hg/Hg2Cl2) and a platinum (Pt) wire were employed as the reference and counter electrodes, respectively. To define the active electrode area, all regions except for a 0.4 × 0.4 cm2 section were masked with epoxy to prevent contact with the electrolyte. A 0.5 M aqueous sodium sulfate (Na2SO4) solution was used as the electrolyte, and a solar simulator (PEC-L01, Peccell Technology) provided the illumination.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 1(a) and 1(b) show cross-sectional SEM images of MoS2 grown for 10 min on ITO and graphene substrates, respectively, illustrating the morphological characteristics of the nanosheet structures. The insets provide top-view SEM images for additional perspective. As shown in Figure 1(a), MoS2 grown at 290 °C for 10 min (hereafter referred to as pristine MoS2) exhibits vertically aligned, densely packed nanosheets with sharp edges. The average size of the nanosheets is approximately 200–240 nm. Similarly, MoS2 grown on graphene (Figure 1(b)) forms vertically oriented nanosheets that uniformly cover the substrate, demonstrating morphological features comparable to those of pristine MoS2.

Figure 1(c) and 1(d) present the Raman spectra of the graphene, pristine MoS2, and the MoS2/graphene heterostructure. The pristine MoS2 shows two prominent peaks at 381.2 and 404.7 cm–1, corresponding to the in-plane E1 2g and out-of-plane A1g vibrational modes of 2H-MoS2, respectively[16, 22]. The MoS2/graphene heterostructure displays similar E1 2g and A1g peaks, while no noticeable Raman features are observed from the graphene substrate in this spectral region (300–500 cm–1). However, within the Raman range of 1200–2800 cm–1, the presence of characteristic G and 2D bands (Figure 1(d)) confirms that the graphene layer remained following the MOCVD growth of MoS2 [23]. This result indicates that the proposed synthesis method is suitable for fabricating high-quality MoS2/graphene heterostructures while preserving the underlying graphene.

X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was employed to investigate the chemical bonding states of the sample. Figure 1(e) and (f) present the deconvoluted XPS core-level spectra of Mo 3d and S 2p obtained from the MoS2/graphene sample. All spectra were fitted using a Gaussian–Lorentzian function with a Shirley background, enabling detailed analysis of the characteristic peaks. As shown in Figure 1(e), the Mo 3d core-level spectrum of the MoS2/graphene sample exhibits two prominent peaks at 229.5 and 232.6 eV, which are assigned to the Mo 3d5/2 and 3d3/2 states of the 2H phase, respectively[12]. In the same spectrum, the S 2s peak appears at 226.7 eV, while a weak peak at 235.9 eV corresponds to Mo6+ species, indicating slight surface oxidation. This oxidation is likely caused by unavoidable exposure to ambient air during sample transfer for analysis[16]. Furthermore, the S 2p core-level spectrum shown in Figure 1(f) displays two characteristic peaks at 162.4 and 163.6 eV, which are attributed to the S 2p3/2 and S 2p1/2 states of MoS2, respectively. The binding energies of the Mo 3d, S 2s, and S 2p peaks are consistent with previously reported values for 2H-MoS2 [12], further confirming the successful formation of MoS2 on graphene, in agreement with the Raman analysis.

Fig. 1. SEM images of (a) pristine MoS2 and (b) MoS2/graphene heterostructure. Raman spectra of various samples (graphene, pristine MoS2, and MoS2/graphene) in the (c) 300–500 cm–1 and (d) 1200–2800 cm–1 region. XPS spectra of (e) Mo 3d, and (f) S 2p core levels for MoS2/graphene sample

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2026.64.3.204/fig1.png

Figure 2(a)–(d) presents the morphological characteristics of the MoS2/graphene heterostructures with different MoS2 growth times (2, 5, 10, and 30 min, hereafter referred to as MG-2m, MG-5m, MG-10m, and MG-30m, respectively). The insets show corresponding top-view SEM images. At a growth time of 2 min (MG-2m), a uniform MoS2 thin film with a thickness of approximately 80 nm was formed, as shown in Figure 2(a). In addition, nanoparticles with diameters ranging from ~90 to 110 nm could be partially observed (inset of Figure 2(a)). When the growth time increased to 5 min (MG-5m), the MoS2 morphology changed to vertically aligned nanosheets with sizes of approximately 150–180 nm (Figure 2(b)). When growth times were further increased to 10 min and 30 min (MG-10m and MG-30m), the nanosheet structures continued to grow, reaching average sizes of approximately 230–270 nm and 880–960 nm, as shown in Figure 2(c) and 2(d), respectively. Figure 2(e) displays a TEM image of the MG-10m sample, clearly showing uniformly distributed vertical nanosheets. A high-resolution TEM (HRTEM) image taken from the yellow-boxed region in Figure 2(e) is shown in Figure 2(f), revealing a lattice spacing of approximately 0.63 nm, which corresponds to the (002) plane of the 2H-phase MoS2 [23].

Fig. 2. (a) SEM images of MoS2 synthesized on graphene substrate at various growth times: (a) MG-2m at 2 min, (b) MG-5m at 5 min, (c) MG-10m at 10 min, and (d) MG-30m at 30 min. (e) Low-magnification TEM image of MG-10m and (f) HRTEM image.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2026.64.3.204/fig2.png

To investigate the optical properties of the samples, a series of systematic analyses, including UV–Vis absorbance, PL, and TRPL, were carried out. Figure 3(a) presents the UV–Vis absorption spectra of the graphene, pristine MoS2, and the MoS2/graphene heterostructure (MG-10m). Both pristine MoS2 and MG-10m exhibit two characteristic absorbance peaks at approximately 604 nm and 661 nm, corresponding to direct bandgap transitions at the K point in the Brillouin zone of MoS2 [24, 25]. The slight difference in absorbance between the two samples is attributed to the weak absorbance of the underlying graphene layer. To gain further insights into the photoexcited carrier dynamics, PL and TRPL measurements were performed on pristine MoS2 and the MoS2/graphene heterostructures (MG-2m, MG-5m, MG-10m, and MG-30m). As shown in Figure 3(b), the pristine MoS2 sample exhibits a strong PL emission peak centered at approximately 675 nm, characteristic of direct bandgap transitions, in agreement with previous reports[23]. For the MoS2/graphene heterostructures with vertically aligned nanosheet structures (MG-5m, MG-10m, and MG-30m), PL peaks were observed at approximately 682 nm. In contrast, the MG-2m sample, which has a thin-film structure, exhibited a broader PL emission in the 700–750 nm range, likely originating from an indirect bandgap transition[26, 27]. Notably, all of the MoS2/graphene heterostructures exhibited significantly lower PL intensities compared to pristine MoS2, indicating recombination of photoexcited electron–hole pairs is being suppressed[23, 26]. This decreased PL intensity is attributed to the MoS2/graphene heterojunction effect, which facilitates efficient charge separation and carrier transport across the MoS2/graphene interface, potentially enhancing PEC performance[26, 28]. The TRPL decay profiles of pristine MoS2 and the MoS2/graphene heterostructures are presented in Figure 3(c), with the extracted carrier lifetimes summarized in the inset table. Pristine MoS2 exhibited an average carrier lifetime of 11.7 ns, whereas the MoS2/graphene samples demonstrated shorter lifetimes (MG-2m: 10.0 ns, MG-5m: 9.2 ns, MG-10m: 8.9 ns, and MG-30m: 10.1 ns). These shortened lifetimes can be attributed to the MoS2/graphene heterostructure, which facilitates the efficient separation and transport of photogenerated carriers to the semiconductor–liquid interface. In particular, the vertically aligned nanosheet architecture further enhances carrier extraction by providing effective charge transport pathways through their highly conductive edges[12, 26]. Meanwhile, MG-30m showed a slight increase in carrier lifetime compared to MG-10m, which is attributed to increased recombination resulting from the limited diffusion length of photogenerated carriers in the larger nanosheet structures[29]. This trend is consistent with the PL results.

Fig. 3. (a) UV–Vis absorbance spectra of graphene, pristine MoS2, and the MoS2/graphene heterostructure (MG-10m). (b) PL spectra and (c) TRPL results of MoS2, MG-2m, MG-5m, MG-10m, and MG-30m. The inset table in (c) lists the photogenerated carrier lifetimes based on corresponding TRPL measurements.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2026.64.3.204/fig3.png

The PEC activities of pristine MoS2 and MoS2/graphene (MG-10m) heterostructures were evaluated by recording linear sweep voltammograms under dark conditions and simulated AM 1.5G illumination. As shown in Figure 4(a), MG-10m exhibited an enhanced photocurrent density (2.44 mA cm–2 at 0.8 V) compared to pristine MoS2 (1.65 mA cm–2 at 0.8 V) across the entire potential range, while their dark currents (dotted lines) remained comparable. The onset potential, defined as the potential at the intersection of the dark current and the tangent to the region of photocurrent slope, was approximately 0.49 V for pristine MoS2. In contrast, MG-10m showed a cathodic shift in onset potential to approximately 0.44 V, indicating improved catalytic activity. The enhanced photocurrent and reduced onset potential observed in MG-10m are attributed to more effective separation and the transfer of photogenerated carriers at the MoS2/graphene heterojunction[23, 28], which was further corroborated by EIS. Figure 4(b) presents the EIS Nyquist plots of pristine MoS2 and MG-10m under illumination. These Nyquist plots were fitted using a simplified Randles circuit, as shown in the inset of Figure 4(b), which consists of solution resistance (Rs), charge transfer resistance (Rct), and a constant phase element (C). According to prior studies, a smaller semicircle diameter in Nyquist plots corresponds to a lower charge transfer resistance (Rct), indicating more efficient carrier transport[30-32]. Consistent with this, MG-10m displayed a smaller semicircle than pristine MoS2, confirming the enhanced separation and transport of photogenerated electron–hole pairs across the heterojunction.

Furthermore, the PEC performance was significantly affected by the morphology and nanosheet size of MoS2 grown via the morphology-controlled MOCVD method. Figure 4(c) displays the photocurrent (solid lines) and dark current (dotted lines) densities of MoS2/graphene heterostructures synthesized at various growth times (MG-2m, MG-5m, MG-10m, and MG-30m). The MG-5m sample showed a notable increase in photocurrent compared to MG-2m, and MG-10m exhibited the highest PEC performance. However, when the growth time was extended to 30 min (MG-30m), the PEC performance did not improve, and instead deteriorated compared to MG-10m. This tendency may be due to the following factors. (i) Small-sized particles and nanosheets showed relatively unsatisfactory PEC performances because their specific surface areas were not significantly improved. (ii) Large and excessively packed vertical nanosheets can limit the diffusion length of the carriers and reduce active site exposure owing to their high overlap with each other, which leads to the degradation in PEC reactivity[12, 33]. Previous studies have shown that a significant portion of photogenerated charge carriers generated in the upper regions of MoS2 nanosheets beyond the diffusion length contributes minimally to the PEC reaction[29], which accounts for the low photocurrent observed in MG-30m with excessively large nanosheets. These findings indicate why MG-10m, which features vertically aligned nanosheets of optimal size and density, achieved the best PEC performance. Figure 4(d) presents the EIS Nyquist plots for all of the MoS2/graphene heterostructures. MG-2m exhibited the largest semicircle diameter due to its limited surface area and poor PEC activity. Conversely, MG-10m showed the smallest semicircle, consistent with its superior PEC photocurrent performance, confirming efficient carrier separation and transport facilitated by its optimized nanostructure.

Fig. 4. (a) Photocurrent and dark density-potential curves of pristine MoS2 and MG-10m PEC cells. (b) EIS Nyquist plots of MoS2 and MG-10m under illumination. (c) Current density-potential curves and (d) EIS Nyquist plots of PEC cells with various working electrodes (MG-2m, MG-5m, MG-10m, and MG-30m).

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2026.64.3.204/fig4.png

4. CONCLUSIONS

In this study, vertically aligned MoS2 nanosheets were successfully synthesized and practically optimized on graphene using a controllable MOCVD system. The resulting MoS2/graphene heterostructures, featuring vertically oriented nanosheets, demonstrated enhanced PEC water splitting performance. This improvement can be attributed to the following main factors: (i) the formation of an ideal nanostructure, where edge-rich vertical MoS2 nanosheets grown on graphene expose a large number of active sites; and (ii) the efficient separation and suppressed recombination of photogenerated charge carriers enabled by the heterojunction effect between MoS2 and graphene. Furthermore, the morphology and size of the MoS2 nanosheets were found to play a critical role in determining the PEC performance and carrier transport behavior of the heterostructures, and optimal PEC performance was achieved in structures with appropriately sized vertical nanosheets. These results highlight a promising strategy that combines morphology-controlled synthesis with heterojunction engineering of TMD nanosheets and graphene, offering potential for efficient PEC and other photocatalytic applications.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This work was supported by Chungnam National University.

REFERENCES

1 
Hurh D., Kim J. H., Korean J. Met. Mater., 63, 152 (2025)DOI
2 
Walter M. G., Warren E. L., Mckone J. R., Boettcher S. W., Mi Q. X., Santori E. A., Lewis N. S., Chem. Rev., 110, 6446 (2010)DOI
3 
Hong Y., Jeon S. H., Ryu H., Lee W. J., Korean J. Met. Mater., 58, 263 (2020)DOI
4 
Quang N. D., Hu W., Chang H. S., Van P. C., Viet D. D., Jeong J. R., Seo D. B., Kim E. T., Kim C., Kim D., Chem. Eng. J., 417, 129278 (2021)DOI
5 
Jeon S. H., Jeong H., Bae S., Ryu H., Lee W. J., Korean J. Met. Mater., 59, 177 (2021)DOI
6 
Azad A., Kim S. J., Korean J. Met. Mater., 60, 517 (2022)DOI
7 
Wang Y., Tian W., Chen C., Xu W., Li L., Adv. Funct. Mater., 29, 1809036 (2019)Google Search
8 
Bae S., Lee S., Ryu H., Lee W. J., Korean J. Met. Mater., 60, 577 (2022)DOI
9 
Lee B. R., Lee M. G., Park H., Lee T. H., Lee S. A., Bhat S. S. M., Kim C., Lee S., Jang H. W., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 11, 20004 (2019)DOI
10 
Kim E., Lee S., Ryu S., Korean J. Met. Mater., 61, 115 (2023)DOI
11 
Seo D. B., Kim M. S., Trung T. N., Kim E. T., Electrochim. Acta, 364, 137164 (2020)DOI
12 
Seo D. B., Kim J., Jo Y. M., Kim D. I., Lim T. G., Kang S., Yim S., Lee S. S., Kim E. T., An K. S., Energy Environ. Mater., 8, e70055 (2025)Google Search
13 
Bae S. S., Seo D. B., Jayarathna R. A., Lee S., Kim E. T., Mater. Lett., 326, 132914 (2022)DOI
14 
Park H.G., Lee J.H., Heo K., Korean J. Met. Mater., 62, 154 (2024)DOI
15 
Ding Q., Song B., Xu P., Jin S., Chem., 1, 699 (2016)DOI
16 
Seo D. B., Kwon Y. M., Kim J., Kang S., Yim S., Lee S. S., Kim E. T., Song W., An K. S., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 16, 28613 (2024)DOI
17 
Kuang P., Sayed M., Fan J., Cheng B., Yu J., Adv. Energy Mater., 10, 1903802 (2020)Google Search
18 
Carraro F., Calvillo L., Cattelan M., Favaro M., Righetto M., Nappini S., Píš I., Celorrio V., Fermín D. J., Martucci A., Agnoli S., Granozzi G., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 7, 25685 (2015)DOI
19 
Biroju R. K., Das D., Sharma R., Pal S., Mawlong L. P. L., Bhorkar K., Giri P. K., Singh A. K., Narayanan T. N., ACS Energy Lett., 2, 1355 (2017)DOI
20 
He H., Lin J., Fu W., Wang X., Wang H., Zeng Q., Gu Q., Li Y., Yan C., Tay B. K., Xue C., Hu X., Pantelides S. T., Zhou W., Liu Z., Adv. Energy Mater., 6, 1600464 (2016)Google Search
21 
Nang L. V., Kim E. T., J. Electrochem. Soc., 159, K93 (2012)DOI
22 
Park S. Y., Seo D. B., Choi H., Lee J. H., Lee D. H., Kim J., Kang S., Yim S., Kim E. T., Lee S. S., Yoon D. H., Kim H. Y., Song W., An K. S., Adv. Funct. Mater., 34, 2310178 (2024)Google Search
23 
Seo D. B., Trung T. N., Kim D. O., Duc D. V., Hong S., Sohn Y., Jeong J. R., Kim E. T., Nano-Micro Lett., 12, 172 (2020)Google Search
24 
Eda G., Yamaguchi H., Voiry D., Fujita T., Chen M., Chhowalla M., Nano Lett., 11, 5111 (2011)DOI
25 
Trung T. N., Seo D. B., Quang N. D., Kim D., Kim E. T., Electrochim. Acta, 260, 150 (2018)DOI
26 
Seo D. B., Trung T. N., Bae S. S., Kim E. T., Nanomaterials, 11, 1585 (2021)DOI
27 
Zhang X., Nan H., Xiao S., Wan X., Gu X., Du A., Ni Z., Ostrikov K., Nat. Commun., 10, 598 (2019)Google Search
28 
Yu X., Du R., Li B., Zhang Y., Liu H., Qu J., An X., Appl. Catal. B, 182, 504 (2016)Google Search
29 
Seo D. B., Dongquoc V., Jayarathna R. A., Lee S., Lee J. H., Kim E. T., J. Alloy. Compd., 911, 165090 (2022)DOI
30 
Roy K., Maitra S., Ghosh D., Kumar P., Devi P., Chem. Eng. J., 435, 134963 (2022)DOI
31 
Seo D. B., Kwon Y. M., Kang S., Yim S., Lee S. S., Song W., An K. S., Chem. Eng. J., 496, 153936 (2024)DOI
32 
Seo D. B., Kim D., Kim M. R., Kwon J., Kook H. J., Kang S., Yim S., Lee S. S., Shin D. O., An K. S., Park S., Nano-Micro Lett., 17, 224 (2025)Google Search
33 
Liu C., Wang L., Tang Y., Luo S., Liu Y., Zhang S., Zeng Y., Xu Y., Appl. Catal. B-Environ., 164, 1 (2015)Google Search