4.7 Article

On fast LuAG:Ce scintillation ceramics with Ca2+ co-dopants

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CERAMIC SOCIETY
Volume 104, Issue 2, Pages 966-973

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jace.17506

Keywords

Ca2+ co‐ doping; Ca2+ concentration; scintillation performance

Funding

  1. National Key Research & Development Program of China [2017YFB0310503]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016M601654]
  3. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB16030700]
  4. Youth Innovation Promotion Association of CAS
  5. National Nature Science Funds of China [11535010, U1830125]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effects of Ca2+ co-doping on the scintillation properties of LuAG:Ce were investigated, showing significant improvement in scintillation performance. Especially the 0.2 at.% Ca2+ co-doped sample exhibited high light yield, fast scintillation decay time, and minimal slow component contamination. The role of Ca2+ in the scintillation mechanism of LuAG:Ce ceramics was also discussed in the study.
Defect engineering was a valid strategy to modify the performance of LuAG:Ce scintillator, usually realized by Me2+/Me+ co-doping. To investigate the effects of Ca2+ co-doping on the scintillation properties of LuAG:Ce, a set of LuAG:Ce ceramics with Ca2+ concentrations ranging from 0 to 0.5 at.% were manufactured. The absorption spectra, radioluminescence spectra (RL spectra), light yield, RL spectra as a function of temperature, decay time, and TSL curves of the ceramic products were carefully measured. With Ca2+ co-doping, the scintillation performance of LuAG:Ce ceramics was greatly improved. Especially for the 0.2 at.% Ca2+ co-doped one, it has a high light yield value of 24, 400 ph/MeV, a fast scintillation decay time of 48 ns, and a small slow component contamination. And the role of Ca2+ in the scintillation mechanism of LuAG:Ce ceramics was also discussed in this paper.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available