4.6 Article

Structural, vibrational and luminescence properties of solid solution based on the (1-x/2) Ce2(WO4)3 + (x/2) Sm2(WO4)3 system

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR STRUCTURE
卷 1263, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.molstruc.2022.133045

关键词

Samarium cerium tungstates; Chemical substitution; Structure defects, Photoluminescence

资金

  1. Regional Council of Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur
  2. CeSigma company (Le Pradet France)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A series of polycrystalline cerium samarium tungstates belonging to a solid solution Ce(2-x)Smx(WO4)3 were synthesized and characterized. Structural defects were observed and the emission spectra were mainly attributed to Sm3+ cations.
A series of 14 polycrystalline cerium samarium tungstates belonging to the system [(1-x/2)center dot Ce-2(WO4)(3) + x/2 Sm-2(WO4)(3)] was synthesized by a coprecipitation method followed by thermal treatment at 1000 degrees C. The polycrystalline samples were characterized by X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy and Raman spectroscopy. Their crystal structure was subjected to Rietveld refinement calculations and quasi-linear variation of cell parameters was observed, suggesting the formation of a solid solution Ce(2-x)Smx(WO4)(3) (0 <= x <= 2). Raman spectroscopy was used to confirm the formation of the disordered solid solution. The analyses of Bragg peak and Raman emission profiles allowed evidencing the formation of structural defects. Scanning electron microscopy images show relatively well crystallized grains. Photoluminescence experiments were performed under polychromatic X-ray excitation delivered by copper source. The characteristic luminescence of Ce3+ cations was not observed whatever the composition x. The resulting emissions were ascribed to Sm3+ cations associated with additional emission from structural defects. Chromaticity diagrams show that color coordinates vary with Sm composition and structural defects in the orange-red range. (C) 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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