Premium
Do Eu dopants prefer the precipitated LaF 3 nanocrystals in glass ceramics?
Author(s) -
Jiang Nan,
Zhou Shifeng,
Su Dong,
Qiu Jianrong
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
physica status solidi (rrl) – rapid research letters
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.786
H-Index - 68
eISSN - 1862-6270
pISSN - 1862-6254
DOI - 10.1002/pssr.201206476
Subject(s) - dopant , nanocrystal , materials science , silicate glass , transmission electron microscopy , silicate , glass ceramic , ceramic , rare earth , matrix (chemical analysis) , nanoparticle , mineralogy , chemical engineering , nanotechnology , doping , metallurgy , composite material , chemistry , optoelectronics , engineering
Previous experimental results, using techniques associated with transmission electron microscopy (TEM), suggested that rare‐earth dopants prefer the precipitated fluoride nanocrystals to the glass matrix. By contrast, this work shows that contradicting results can be obtained under different experimental conditions. In the silicate glass containing LaF 3 nanocrystals, the Eu dopants distribute indistinguishably in the precipitated LaF 3 and the silicate glass matrix. However, electron beam exposure during the measurement can relocate Eu, leading to the false conclusion that apparently Eu prefers the precipitated LaF 3 nanoparticles to the glass matrix. Fortunately, the artefact can be avoided by shortening the exposure time. (© 2012 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)