Re: [Ifeffit] Self absorption or Ce4+ reduction in the CeO2 film?

[Anatoly Frenkel]

Self absorption. 
There was a similar question a few weeks ago. 

Anatoly

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:11 AM, Weizi Yuan  
> wrote:
> 
> 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. 
> 
>  
> -- 
> Regards,
> Weizi Yuan,
> Graduate Student,
> Northwestern University,
> Ph:(+1)312-560-9619
> ___
> 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
___
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

[Ifeffit] Self absorption or Ce4+ reduction in the CeO2 film?

[Weizi Yuan]

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
___
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