4.7 Article

Ce3+ doped Lu3Al5O12 ceramics prepared by spark plasma sintering technology using micrometre powders: Microstructure, luminescence, and scintillation properties

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN CERAMIC SOCIETY
卷 42, 期 14, 页码 6663-6670

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2022.07.014

关键词

Ceramic scintillator; Spark plasma sintering (SPS) technology; Grain size; Light yield; Ce-LuAG

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [62175249, 61475175]
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA22010301]
  3. Shanghai Sciences and Technology Commission Foundation [19DZ1100703, 18511110400]
  4. Shanghai Sailing Program [17YF1421500]
  5. Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation [00657-2020-0006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ce3+ doped Lu3Al5O12 ceramics were successfully fabricated by SPS, and their properties such as grain size and photoluminescence were investigated. The results showed that the SPS ceramics had smaller grain size, excellent thermal stability, and higher radioluminescence intensity.
Ce3+ doped Lu3Al5O12 (Ce:LuAG) ceramics were fabricated by the solid-state reaction method through spark plasma sintering (SPS) from 1350 C to 1700 C for 5 min at a pressure of 50 MPa using micro powders. The average grain size of the SPSed ceramics gradually grew from 0.42 mu m (1400 C) to 1.55 mu m (1700 C), which is nearly one order of magnitude lower than that of vacuum sintered (VSed) Ce:LuAG ceramics (-24.6 mu m). Characteristic Ce3+ emission peaking at around 510 nm appeared and 92% photoluminescence intensity of room temperature can be reserved at 200 C revealing excellent thermal stability. The maximum radioluminescence intensity reached around 3 times of VSed Ce:LuAG ceramics and 7.8 times of BGO crystals. The maximum scintillation light yield under gamma-ray (Cs-137) excitation reached 9634 pho/MeV @ 2 mu s. It is concluded that SPS technology is a feasible way to develop Ce:LuAG ceramics and further optical enhancement can be expected.

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