Send Ifeffit mailing list submissions to
ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ifeffit-request@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
You can reach the person managing the list at
ifeffit-owner@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Ifeffit digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Self absorption or Ce4+ reduction in the CeO2 film? (Weizi Yuan)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:11:05 -0500
From: Weizi Yuan <weiziyuan2015@u.northwestern.edu >
To: ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
Subject: [Ifeffit] Self absorption or Ce4+ reduction in the CeO2 film?
Message-ID:
<CAKT5DaU1U2UX7bVUx9ffhvTfE7txqnZDgGu3cNujM6ceQyp6Hg@mail. >gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear all,
I have measured some spectra of a CeO2 film(~200nm) grown on Yittria
stablized Zirconia(YSZ) substrate under 2 conditions.
(i) room temperature, ambient atmosphere
(ii) room temperature, vacuum (pO2~1E-6 atm) inside a graphite dome of the
DHS 1100 anton paar,
The spectra are collected in fluorescence mode. The incident angle is 3 o
and the fluorescence collection angle is 90 o.
My questions are:
(i) From the theory behind the FLUO program developed Dr. Daniel Haskel,
CeO2 spectra collected with a 3 o incident angle *would have a strong self
absorption effect and need*
correction , however, *the signal *is not attenuated compared with the
CeO2 powder taken in a transmission mode, shown in attached plot.
I've gone through many literature and people sometimes tell that whether
they have a successful self absorption correction by comparing the
spectrum with a spectrum taken under a transmission mode.
So I'm wondering if I can say that I don't need a self absorption
correction in this case?
(ii)
The Ce4+ peak in the spectrum collected under condition (ii) has a much
lower intensity. I think it is due to the reduction of Ce 4+ under vacuum,
however, the Ce3+ peak does not show an increased signal here. Which makes
ma doubt whether this is simply reduction of Ce *or might be from over
absorption? *
Thanks for any response.
[image: Inline image 1]
--
Regards,
Weizi Yuan,
Graduate Student,
Northwestern University,
Ph:(+1)312-560-9619
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/pipermail/ifeffit/ >attachments/20170622/8538b4ae/ attachment.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spectra.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 48213 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/pipermail/ifeffit/ >attachments/20170622/8538b4ae/ attachment.jpg
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
Unsubscribe: http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/ifeffit
------------------------------
End of Ifeffit Digest, Vol 172, Issue 15
****************************************