Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T17:54:18.595Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Correlation of Xanes Features with the Scintillation Efficiencies of Ce Doped Alkaline Earth Lithium Silicate Glasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

D L Blanchard
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Box 999, Richland, WA 99352
D S Sunberg
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Box 999, Richland, WA 99352
R A Craig
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Box 999, Richland, WA 99352
M Bliss
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Box 999, Richland, WA 99352
M J Weber
Affiliation:
Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94551
Get access

Abstract

Cerium activated glasses of composition 20Li2O·15MO·64.4SiO2·0.6Ce2O3 (where M is Mg, Ca, Sr, or Ba) exhibit scintillation efficiencies that vary by more than a factor of 2.5 with the alkaline earth. Previous work has suggested a correlation between the microstructure of these glasses and scintillation efficiency. Measurements of the Ce LIII x-ray absorption edge in the Mg, Ca and Sr glasses display a feature near the absorption edge that is suggestive of the presence of Ce4+. The area of this peak is, in fact, correlated with the scintillation efficiency of the glass. The amount of Ce4+ indicated by the intensity of this feature is, however, too high to be a permanent population. We suspect that the feature is a transient phenomenon related to creation of Ce4+ and trapped electrons due to photoionization by the x-ray beam.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Bliss, M.et al., MRS Symposium Proceedings, 348, 195 (1994).Google Scholar
2. Weber, M.J., Solid State Comm, 12, 741 (1973).Google Scholar
3. Klassen, N.V., MRS Symposium Proceedings, 348, 247 (1994)Google Scholar
4. Rodnyi, P.A. et al., MRS Symposium Proceedings, 348, 379 (1994).Google Scholar
5. Ginther, R. J., IRE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS- 5, 92 (1958).Google Scholar
6. Bliss, M., et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods, A 345, 95 (1994).Google Scholar
7. Stem, E.A. and Heald, S.M., Rev. Sci. Inst. 50, 1579 (1979), F.W. Lytle et al, Nucl. Inst. Meth. 226, 542 (1984).Google Scholar
8. Kaindl, G. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 606 (1987).Google Scholar
9. Soldatov, A.V. et al., Phys. Rev. B, 50 5074 (1994).Google Scholar
10. Finkelstein, L.D. et al., Materials Letters 14, 115 (1992).Google Scholar
11. Bianconi, A. et al., Phys Rev B 35, 806 (1987).Google Scholar
12. Dexpert, H. et al, Phys Rev B, 36, 1750 (1987).Google Scholar
13. Parks, R.D. et al., Phys Rev B, 28, 3556 (1983).Google Scholar
14. Fujimori, A., Phys Rev B 28, 4489 (1983).Google Scholar
15. Wuilloud, E et al., Phys Rev Lett 53, 202 (1984).Google Scholar
16. Mirabelli, F et al., Phys Rev B 46, 10012 (1992).Google Scholar
17. Puerta, J. and Martin, P., Appl. Optics 20, 3923 (1981).Google Scholar
18. Ishii, Y. et al., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 70, 72 (1987).Google Scholar
19. Weber, M. J., et al., “Scintillators and Applications: Cerium-DopedMaterials”, Proceedings of EURODIM94 (Seventh Europhysical Conference on Defects in Materials), Lyon, France, July 5–8, 1994.Google Scholar