4.7 Article

An experimental and theoretical study on the photoluminescence of O and Br co-doped ZnS quantum dots synthesized by a solid-state reaction method

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALLOYS AND COMPOUNDS
卷 845, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.155405

关键词

ZnS; Quantum dots; Photoluminescence; Co-doped; First-principles calculations

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61964008]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province, China [20181BAB206011]
  3. Science and Technology Foundation of Education Department of Jiangxi Province [GJJ170665, GJJ190262]
  4. Doctoral Starting up Foundation of Jiangxi Science and Technology Normal University
  5. Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province, China [LY18E020007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ZnS and ZnS0.96-xO0.04Brx (0 <= x <= 0.07) quantum dots (QDs) were synthesized via a solid-state reaction method at low temperature. The effects O and Br co-doping on the crystal structure, particle size, morphology, chemical state, energetic and electronic properties, and photoluminescence (PL) of ZnS QDs were researched by X-ray diffraction (XRD), transmission electron microscope (TEM), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and diffuse reflection and PL spectra combining with first-principles calculations, respectively. The results showed that all samples had a cubic blend structure, and the average crystallite size was about 3.3-4.5 nm. The band gap of ZnS QDs was widened from 3.64 to 3.76 eV by Oand Br co-doping, and the blue shift of emission peak was observed. It indicated that the luminescence intensity was strengthened after co-doping, and ZnS0.93O0.04Br0.03 QDs showed the strongest emission, which was about 9 and 2.5 times stronger than that of ZnS and ZnS0.96O0.04 QDs, respectively. First-principles calculations were used to explain the origin of high PL intensity, and the results implied that both O and Br effectively enhanced the density of electron carries. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据