4.4 Article

Normal and anomalous heating rate effects on thermoluminescence of Ce-doped ZnB2O4

期刊

APPLIED RADIATION AND ISOTOPES
卷 128, 期 -, 页码 256-262

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apradiso.2017.07.032

关键词

Thermoluminescence; Heating rate; Ce-3 (+) doped ZnB2O4; VHR method

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of heating rate (HR) on thermoluminescence (TL) glow curves of 1%, 4%, and 10% Ce-3 (+) doped ZnB2O4 phosphors was investigated in detail. The glow peaks are examined and, activation energy (E) and frequency factor (s) are determined by using various heating rate (VHR) method. In the obtained glow curves with nine different HRs between 2 and 10 degrees C/s, it was observed that the TL intensities of the first peaks of all three samples and the second peak of 10% Ce-3 (+) doped sample decrease with increasing HR. The decrease in TL intensity was investigated whether it may be due to the presence of thermal quenching or not. On the other hand, the second glow peaks of 1, 4% Ce-3 (+) doped ZnB2O4 phosphors show an anomalous TL behavior, which the probability of the radiative processes increases due to recombination of free electrons, so the TL intensity increases with the HR. The graphs of full width at the half maximum (FWHM) versus HR were also plotted to evaluate the influence of HR on TL intensity. In this paper, we suggest that the non-localized Schon - Klasens model may give an explanation for the second peaks of 1, 4% Ce-3 (+) doped ZnB2O4 phosphors showing an unexpected increase with the increasing HR. In addition, the calculated E values of all doped phosphors were found similar in the range of 0.47-0.53 eV for peak 1 and 0.61-0.66 eV for peak 2. However, s values of Ce-3 (+) doped ZnB2O4 phosphors were found slightly different according to the dopant amount and the equation used. Furthermore, different amount of Ce-3 (+) doped samples indicate the similar properties for the repeated cycles of 5 Gy in the same irradiation conditions.

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

4.4
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