4.6 Article

Activator segregation and micro-luminescence properties in GAGG: Ce ceramics

期刊

JOURNAL OF LUMINESCENCE
卷 236, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jlumin.2021.118140

关键词

Segregation; Garnet; Ceramics; Photoluminescence; Scintillator

类别

资金

  1. Russian Federation Government [14.W03.31.0004]
  2. project FARAD - European Social Fund via the Lithuanian Research Council [09.3.3-LMT-K-712-01-0013]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study focuses on Ce-doped ceramics as potential low-cost ceramic scintillators, with Ce segregation at grain boundaries enhancing Ce3+ photoluminescence. Most Ce ions in the ceramics are found to be stabilized in the Ce3+ state, which is promising for the development of GAGG:Ce ceramics as luminescent materials for lighting and scintillator applications.
BBCeramic scintillators are promising due to their potentially low cost. Here, we report on our study of Ce-doped ceramics. Typical garnet-type ceramics Gd2.97Ce0.03Al2Ga3O12 was fabricated for the study from co-precipitated powders by high-temperature sintering in air. Its structure and composition are characterized using Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) imaging, Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), Electron Energy Loss Spectroscopy (EELS), Electron Backscattered Diffraction (EBSD) mapping, X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) and X-ray Absorption Near Edge Structure (XANES) measurements. The spatial distribution of luminescence properties at the microlevel is studied using scanning confocal microscopy. Cerium segregation at the grain boundaries was revealed by compositional characterization and is in line with enhanced Ce3+ photoluminescence observed at the boundaries. Meanwhile, no excess partitioning of Ce4+ ions at the grain boundaries is observed. It is found that most of Ce ions in the ceramics are stabilized in the state Ce3+, what is encouraging in view of the further development of GAGG:Ce ceramics as a promising luminescence material for lighting and scintillator application.

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

4.6
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