Characteristic X-ray yields and cross sections of thick targets of Al, Ti, Zr, W and Au induced by keV-electron impact

Li Ying-Han; An Zhu; Zhu Jing-Jun; Li Ling

doi:10.7498/aps.69.20200264

Abstract

In this paper, pure thick Al (Z = 13), Ti (Z = 22), Zr (Z = 40), W (Z = 74) and Au (Z = 79) targets are bombarded by electrons in an energy range of 5–27 keV, and the experimental thick-target characteristic X-ray yields of K-shell and L-shell, the X-ray production cross sections and the ionization cross sections of inner shells are presented. The present experimental setup and data processing are improved, specifically, a deflection magnet is installed in front of the X-ray detector to prevent the backscattered electron from entering into the X-ray detector, and the bremsstrahlung background spectra calculated from PENELOPE Monte Carlo simulations are used to deduce the net peak areas. The X-ray detector used in this experiment is the XR-100SDD manufactured by Amptek Inc. with a 25 mm² C2 ultra-thin window which can detect the low-energy x-rays down to boron Kα line (0.183 keV). Standard sources (⁵⁵Fe, ⁵⁷Co, ¹³⁷Cs and ²⁴¹Am) with an activity accuracy range of 1%–3% (k = 2), supplied by the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Germany (PTB), are used to perform the detector’s efficiency calibration, and in a low-energy range (< 3.3 keV) the efficiency calibration is accomplished by measuring characteristic X-ray spectra produced by 20 keV electron impacting various thickness solid targets (i.e. by the characteristic peak method). The uncertainty of the detector’s efficiency calibration obtained in this paper is ~1.6%. The experimental thick-target characteristic X-ray yield data with an uncertainty of 1.7%–6.2% are compared with the PENELOPE Monte Carlo simulations, in which the inner-shell ionization cross sections are based on the distorted-wave Born approximation (DWBA) calculations, and they are in good agreement with a difference of less than or ~10%. According to the measured thick-target characteristic x-ray yields, the K-shell ionization cross sections for Al, Ti and Zr and the L-shell X-ray production cross sections for Zr, W and Au are also obtained with an uncertainty of 5%–8% (except for Al due to large K-shell fluorescence yield uncertainty), the difference between the experimental and theoretical data is also less than or ~10%. Moreover, by comparing the thick-target characteristic X-ray yields obtained from the analytical model and the PENELOPE Monte Carlo simulations at the electrons’ incident angles of 45° and 90°, it is found that the degree of agreement between the results from the analytical model and the Monte Carlo simulations at the incident angle of 90° is better than at the incident angle of 45°. Moreover, the contributions of the secondary electrons and bremsstrahlung photons to the characteristic X-ray yield are also given based on the PENELOPE Monte Carlo simulations. As for the elements studied in this paper, for the low ionization threshold energy, the contribution of the secondary electrons is ~2%, and however, for the high ionization threshold energy, the contribution is ~10%–20%. These contributions depend weakly on the energy of the incident electrons and show that these contributions are closely correlated with atomic number.

Keywords:

characteristic X-ray yields /
atomic inner-shell ionization /
characteristic X-ray production cross section /
Monte Carlo simulation

Authors and contacts

Key Laboratory of Radiation Physics and Technology of Ministry of Education, Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, China

Corresponding author: An Zhu, anzhu@scu.edu.cn

FullText HTML : translate this paragraph

References

[1]	Powell C J 1976 Rev. Mod. Phys. 48 33 Google Scholar
[2]	Salvat F, Fernández-Varea J, Sempau J 2008 PENELOPE-2008, A Code System for Monte Carlo Simulation of Electron and Photon Transport (Issy-les-Moulineau: OECD/NEA Data Bank) pp1−324
[3]	Llovet X, Powell C J, Salvat F, Jablonski A 2014 J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 43 013102 Google Scholar
[4]	An Z, Liu M T, Fu Y C, Luo Z M, Tang C H, Li C M, Zhang B H, Tang Y J 2003 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 207 268 Google Scholar
[5]	Wu Y, Wang G Y, Mu Q, Zhao Q 2014 Chin. Phys. B 23 013401 Google Scholar
[6]	Pérez P D, Sepúlveda A, Castellano G, Trincavelli J 2015 Phys. Rev. A 92 062708 Google Scholar
[7]	Limandri S P, Vasconcellos M A Z, Hinrichs R, Trincavelli J C 2012 Phys. Rev. A 86 042701 Google Scholar
[8]	An Z, Luo Z M, Tang C 2001 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 179 334 Google Scholar
[9]	Khare S P, Wadehra J M 1996 Can. J. Phys. 74 376
[10]	Keller S, Whelan C T, Ast H, Walters H R J, Dreizler R M 1994 Phys. Rev. A 50 3865 Google Scholar
[11]	Segui S, Dingfelder M, Salvat F 2003 Phys. Rev. A 67 062710 Google Scholar
[12]	Colgan J, Fontes C J, Zhang H L 2006 Phys. Rev. A 73 062711 Google Scholar
[13]	Bote D, Salvat F 2008 Phys. Rev. A 77 042701 Google Scholar
[14]	Long X G, Liu M T, Ho F Q, Peng X F 1990 At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 45 353 Google Scholar
[15]	Liu M T, An Z, Tang C H, Luo Z M, Peng X F, Long X G 2000 At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 76 213 Google Scholar
[16]	Luo Z M, An Z, He F Q, Li T H, Long X G, Peng X F 1996 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 29 4001 Google Scholar
[17]	An Z, Li T H, Wang L M, Xia X Y, Luo Z M 1996 Phys. Rev. A 54 3067 Google Scholar
[18]	Wu Y, An Z, Duan Y M, Liu M T 2010 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 268 2473 Google Scholar
[19]	Fernandez-Varea J M, Jahnke V, Maidana N L, Malafronte A A, Vanin V R 2014 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 47 155201 Google Scholar
[20]	Campos C S, Vasconcellos M A Z, Trincavelli J C, Segui S 2007 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 40 3835 Google Scholar
[21]	Hombourger C 1998 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 31 3693 Google Scholar
[22]	An Z, Wu Y, Liu M T, Duan Y M, Tang C H 2006 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 246 281 Google Scholar
[23]	Wu Y, Liang Y, Xu M X, Yuan Y, Chang C H, Qian Z C, Wang B Y, Kuang P, Zhang P 2018 Phys. Rev. A 97 032702 Google Scholar
[24]	Zhao J L, Tian L X, Li X L, An Z, Zhu J J, Liu M T 2015 Radiat. Phys. Chem. 107 47 Google Scholar
[25]	Bote D, Llovet X, Salvat F 2008 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 41 105304 Google Scholar
[26]	Li X L, Zhao J L, Tian L X, An Z, Zhu J J, Liu M T 2014 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 333 106 Google Scholar
[27]	Zhang W G, Sun H W, Zeng F Y, Mao L, Wu Q Q, Zhu J J, An Z 2012 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 275 20 Google Scholar
[28]	黄郁旋, 毛莉, 丁伟, 安竹 2016 原子核物理评论 33 45 Google Scholar Huang Y X, Mao L, Ding W, An Z 2016 Nucl. Phys. Rev. 33 45 Google Scholar
[29]	Lee S E, Hatano Y, Hara M, Matsuyama M 2020 Fusion Sci. Technol. (DOI: 10.1080/15361055.2020.1711855)
[30]	Yadav N, Bhatt P, Singh R, Llovet X, Shanker R 2012 J. Electron. Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 185 23 Google Scholar
[31]	Yadav N, Kumar S, Bhatt P, Singh R, Singh B K, Shanker R 2012 J. Electron. Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 185 448 Google Scholar
[32]	Rubel M, Coad J P, Likonen J, Philipps V 2009 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 267 711 Google Scholar
[33]	Zhao J L, An Z, Zhu J J, Tan W J, Liu M T 2016 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 49 065205 Google Scholar
[34]	Li L, An Z, Zhu J, Tan W, Sun Q, Liu M 2019 Phys. Rev. A 99 052701 Google Scholar
[35]	Uzonyi I, Szabó G, Borbély-Kiss I, Kiss Á Z 2003 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 210 147 Google Scholar
[36]	Shima K, Okuda M, Suzuki E, Tsubota T and Mikumo T 1983 J. Appl. Phys. 54 1202
[37]	An Z, Hou Q 2008 Phys. Rev. A 77 042702 Google Scholar
[38]	Omar A, Andreo P, Poludniowski G 2018 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 437 36 Google Scholar
[39]	Hubbell J H, Trehan P N, Singh N, Chand B, Garg M L, Garg R R, Singh S, Puri S, Mehta D 1994 J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 23 339 Google Scholar

Cited By

图 1 (a)实验装置示意图; (b)装置照片

Figure 1. (a)The schematic of experimental setup; (b) photograph of experimental setup.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 2 SDD探测器效率刻度曲线. 空心圆表示Al, Ti, Zr, W和Au的特征X射线位置, 实线表示根据探测器参数计算的效率值

Figure 2. The X-ray detection efficiency of the SSD detector. The positions of the characteristic X-ray lines for Al, Ti, Zr, W and Au are indicated by the open circles. The solid line represents the theoretical values calculated based on the detector’s parameters.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 3 27 keV电子入射厚W靶碰撞产生的实验谱(实线)与PENELOP模拟的轫致辐射本底谱(虚线)

Figure 3. The experimental spectrum (solid line) and the bremsstrahlung background spectrum simulated by PENELOPE (dashed line) produced by 27 keV electron impact on thick W target.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 4 PENELLOPE模拟几何模型示意图

Figure 4. The geometry used in the PENELOPE simulations.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 5 实心圆点表示实验测得不同入射电子能量下的厚靶特征X射线产额, 实线代表相应的蒙特卡罗模拟值, 虚线为蒙特卡罗模拟值归一到实验数据值上的结果, 括号内为归一化参数, 缩略图为实验布局示意图

Figure 5. Solid circles denote the experimental characteristic X-ray yields of thick targets at different incident electron energies. Solid curves represent the results of Monte Carlo simulations using the PENELOPE code. Dashed curves are the scaled results of Monte Carlo simulations by scaling factors that are given in parentheses. The insets show the schematic of experimental geometry.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 6 α = 45°, β = 45°时由PENELOPE计算的特征X射线产额(实心圆点), 其中来自初级电子电离贡献表示为空心圆形, 次级电子电离贡献表示为空心三角形, 轫致辐射光子贡献为空心方形. 实线为方程(2)计算所得结果. 缩略图为计算几何示意图

Figure 6. In the case of α = 45°, β = 45°, the solid dots represent the total characteristic X-ray yields calculated by PENELOPE, which include the contributions from the primary electron ionization (hollow circles), secondary electron ionization(hollow triangles) and bremsstrahlung photon ionization (hollow squares). The solid lines are the characteristic X-ray yields calculated by Eq. (2). The insets show the schematic of calculation geometry.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 7 α = 0°, β = 45°时由PENELOPE计算的特征X射线产额(实心圆点), 其中来自初级电子电离贡献表示为空心圆形, 次级电子电离贡献表示为空心三角形, 轫致辐射光子贡献为空心方形. 实线为方程(2)计算所得结果. 缩略图为计算几何示意图

Figure 7. In the case of α = 45°, β = 45°, the solid dots represent the total characteristic X-ray yields calculated by PENELOPE, which include the contributions from the primary electron ionization (hollow circles), secondary electron ionization(hollow triangles) and bremsstrahlung photon ionization (hollow squares). The solid lines are the characteristic X-ray yields calculated by Eq. (2). The insets show the schematic of calculation geometry.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 8 (a) Al, (b) Ti, (c) Zr元素实验K壳电离截面(实线)与DWBA理论值(虚线), 括号内为修正系数

Figure 8. Experimental K-shell ionization cross sections of (a) Al, (b) Ti, (c) Zr (solid lines) and the DWBA theoretical values (dashed lines). The scaling factors are given in parentheses.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

图 9 (a) Zr, (b)−(d) W, (e)−(g) Au元素实验L壳特征X射线产生截面(实线)与DWBA理论值(虚线), 括号内为修正系数

Figure 9. Experimental L-shell characteristic X-ray production cross sections of (a) Zr, (b)−(d) W, (e)−(g) Au (solid lines) and the DWBA theoretical values (dashed lines). The scaling factors are given in parentheses.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

map

[1]	Powell C J 1976 Rev. Mod. Phys. 48 33 Google Scholar
[2]	Salvat F, Fernández-Varea J, Sempau J 2008 PENELOPE-2008, A Code System for Monte Carlo Simulation of Electron and Photon Transport (Issy-les-Moulineau: OECD/NEA Data Bank) pp1−324
[3]	Llovet X, Powell C J, Salvat F, Jablonski A 2014 J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 43 013102 Google Scholar
[4]	An Z, Liu M T, Fu Y C, Luo Z M, Tang C H, Li C M, Zhang B H, Tang Y J 2003 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 207 268 Google Scholar
[5]	Wu Y, Wang G Y, Mu Q, Zhao Q 2014 Chin. Phys. B 23 013401 Google Scholar
[6]	Pérez P D, Sepúlveda A, Castellano G, Trincavelli J 2015 Phys. Rev. A 92 062708 Google Scholar
[7]	Limandri S P, Vasconcellos M A Z, Hinrichs R, Trincavelli J C 2012 Phys. Rev. A 86 042701 Google Scholar
[8]	An Z, Luo Z M, Tang C 2001 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 179 334 Google Scholar
[9]	Khare S P, Wadehra J M 1996 Can. J. Phys. 74 376
[10]	Keller S, Whelan C T, Ast H, Walters H R J, Dreizler R M 1994 Phys. Rev. A 50 3865 Google Scholar
[11]	Segui S, Dingfelder M, Salvat F 2003 Phys. Rev. A 67 062710 Google Scholar
[12]	Colgan J, Fontes C J, Zhang H L 2006 Phys. Rev. A 73 062711 Google Scholar
[13]	Bote D, Salvat F 2008 Phys. Rev. A 77 042701 Google Scholar
[14]	Long X G, Liu M T, Ho F Q, Peng X F 1990 At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 45 353 Google Scholar
[15]	Liu M T, An Z, Tang C H, Luo Z M, Peng X F, Long X G 2000 At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 76 213 Google Scholar
[16]	Luo Z M, An Z, He F Q, Li T H, Long X G, Peng X F 1996 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 29 4001 Google Scholar
[17]	An Z, Li T H, Wang L M, Xia X Y, Luo Z M 1996 Phys. Rev. A 54 3067 Google Scholar
[18]	Wu Y, An Z, Duan Y M, Liu M T 2010 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 268 2473 Google Scholar
[19]	Fernandez-Varea J M, Jahnke V, Maidana N L, Malafronte A A, Vanin V R 2014 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 47 155201 Google Scholar
[20]	Campos C S, Vasconcellos M A Z, Trincavelli J C, Segui S 2007 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 40 3835 Google Scholar
[21]	Hombourger C 1998 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 31 3693 Google Scholar
[22]	An Z, Wu Y, Liu M T, Duan Y M, Tang C H 2006 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 246 281 Google Scholar
[23]	Wu Y, Liang Y, Xu M X, Yuan Y, Chang C H, Qian Z C, Wang B Y, Kuang P, Zhang P 2018 Phys. Rev. A 97 032702 Google Scholar
[24]	Zhao J L, Tian L X, Li X L, An Z, Zhu J J, Liu M T 2015 Radiat. Phys. Chem. 107 47 Google Scholar
[25]	Bote D, Llovet X, Salvat F 2008 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 41 105304 Google Scholar
[26]	Li X L, Zhao J L, Tian L X, An Z, Zhu J J, Liu M T 2014 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 333 106 Google Scholar
[27]	Zhang W G, Sun H W, Zeng F Y, Mao L, Wu Q Q, Zhu J J, An Z 2012 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 275 20 Google Scholar
[28]	黄郁旋, 毛莉, 丁伟, 安竹 2016 原子核物理评论 33 45 Google Scholar Huang Y X, Mao L, Ding W, An Z 2016 Nucl. Phys. Rev. 33 45 Google Scholar
[29]	Lee S E, Hatano Y, Hara M, Matsuyama M 2020 Fusion Sci. Technol. (DOI: 10.1080/15361055.2020.1711855)
[30]	Yadav N, Bhatt P, Singh R, Llovet X, Shanker R 2012 J. Electron. Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 185 23 Google Scholar
[31]	Yadav N, Kumar S, Bhatt P, Singh R, Singh B K, Shanker R 2012 J. Electron. Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 185 448 Google Scholar
[32]	Rubel M, Coad J P, Likonen J, Philipps V 2009 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 267 711 Google Scholar
[33]	Zhao J L, An Z, Zhu J J, Tan W J, Liu M T 2016 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 49 065205 Google Scholar
[34]	Li L, An Z, Zhu J, Tan W, Sun Q, Liu M 2019 Phys. Rev. A 99 052701 Google Scholar
[35]	Uzonyi I, Szabó G, Borbély-Kiss I, Kiss Á Z 2003 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 210 147 Google Scholar
[36]	Shima K, Okuda M, Suzuki E, Tsubota T and Mikumo T 1983 J. Appl. Phys. 54 1202
[37]	An Z, Hou Q 2008 Phys. Rev. A 77 042702 Google Scholar
[38]	Omar A, Andreo P, Poludniowski G 2018 Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 437 36 Google Scholar
[39]	Hubbell J H, Trehan P N, Singh N, Chand B, Garg M L, Garg R R, Singh S, Puri S, Mehta D 1994 J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 23 339 Google Scholar

[1]	Xun Zhi-Peng, Hao Da-Peng. Monte Carlo simulation of bond percolation on square lattice with complex neighborhoods. Acta Physica Sinica, 2022, 71(6): 066401. doi: 10.7498/aps.71.20211757
[2]	Wang Li-Min, Duan Bing-Huang, Xu Xian-Guo, Li Hao, Chen Zhi-Jun, Yang Kun-Jie, Zhang Shuo. Simulation of neutron irradiation damage in lead lanthanum zirconate titanate by Monte Carlo method. Acta Physica Sinica, 2022, 71(7): 076101. doi: 10.7498/aps.71.20212041
[3]	Su Ning, Liu Yuan-Yuan, Wang Li, Cheng Jian-Ping. Muon radiography simulation for underground palace of Qinshihuang Mausoleum. Acta Physica Sinica, 2022, 71(6): 064201. doi: 10.7498/aps.71.20211582
[4]	Li Bo, Li Ling, Zhu Jing-Jun, Lin Wei-Ping, An Zhu. Measurements of K-shell ionization cross sections and L-shell X-ray production cross sections of Al, Ti, Cu, Ag, and Au thin films by low-energy electron impact. Acta Physica Sinica, 2022, 71(17): 173402. doi: 10.7498/aps.71.20220162
[5]	Wang Guo-Qiang, Zhang Shuo, Yang Jun-Yuan, Xu Xiao-Ke. Study of coupling the age-structured contact patterns to the COVID-19 pandemic transmission. Acta Physica Sinica, 2021, 70(1): 010201. doi: 10.7498/aps.70.20201371
[6]	Ren Jie, Ruan Xi-Chao, Chen Yong-Hao, Jiang Wei, Bao Jie, Luan Guang-Yuan, Zhang Qi-Wei, Huang Han-Xiong, Wang Zhao-Hui, An Qi, Bai Huai-Yong, Bao Yu, Cao Ping, Chen Hao-Lei, Chen Qi-Ping, Chen Yu-Kai, Chen Zhen, Cui Zeng-Qi, Fan Rui-Rui, Feng Chang-Qing, Gao Ke-Qing, Gu Min-Hao, Han Chang-Cai, Han Zi-Jie, He Guo-Zhu, He Yong-Cheng, Hong Yang, Huang Wei-Ling, Huang Xi-Ru, Ji Xiao-Lu, Ji Xu-Yang, Jiang Hao-Yu, Jiang Zhi-Jie, Jing Han-Tao, Kang Ling, Kang Ming-Tao, Li Bo, Li Chao, Li Jia-Wen, Li Lun, Li Qiang, Li Xiao, Li Yang, Liu Rong, Liu Shu-Bin, Liu Xing-Yan, Mu Qi-Li, Ning Chang-Jun, Qi Bin-Bin, Ren Zhi-Zhou, Song Ying-Peng, Song Zhao-Hui, Sun Hong, Sun Kang, Sun Xiao-Yang, Sun Zhi-Jia, Tan Zhi-Xin, Tang Hong-Qing, Tang Jing-Yu, Tang Xin-Yi, Tian Bin-Bin, Wang Li-Jiao, Wang Peng-Cheng, Wang Qi, Wang Tao-Feng, Wen Jie, Wen Zhong-Wei, Wu Qing-Biao, Wu Xiao-Guang, Wu Xuan, Xie Li-Kun, Yang Yi-Wei, Yi Han, Yu Li, Yu Tao, Yu Yong-Ji, Zhang Guo-Hui, Zhang Lin-Hao, Zhang Xian-Peng, Zhang Yu-Liang, Zhang Zhi-Yong, Zhao Yu-Bin, Zhou Lu-Ping, Zhou Zu-Ying, Zhu Dan-Yang, Zhu Ke-Jun, Zhu Peng. In-beam γ-rays of back-streaming white neutron source at China Spallation Neutron Source. Acta Physica Sinica, 2020, 69(17): 172901. doi: 10.7498/aps.69.20200718
[7]	Tian Zi-Ning, Ouyang Xiao-Ping, Chen Wei, Wang Xue-Mei, Deng Ning, Liu Wen-Biao, Tian Yan-Jie. Source boundary parameter of Monte Carlo inversion technology based on virtual source principle. Acta Physica Sinica, 2019, 68(23): 232901. doi: 10.7498/aps.68.20191095
[8]	Qian Yu-Rui, Wu Ying, Yang Xia-Tong, Chen Qiu-Xiang, You Jun-Dong, Wang Bao-Yi, Kuang Peng, Zhang Peng. Experimental study on Ti K shell ionization cross sections induced by 8-9.5 keV positrons. Acta Physica Sinica, 2018, 67(19): 192101. doi: 10.7498/aps.67.20180666
[9]	Li Wen-Fang, Du Jin-Jin, Wen Rui-Juan, Yang Peng-Fei, Li Gang, Zhang Tian-Cai. Single-atom transfer in a strongly coupled cavity quantum electrodynamics: experiment and Monte Carlo simulation. Acta Physica Sinica, 2014, 63(24): 244205. doi: 10.7498/aps.63.244205
[10]	Yang Yi-Wei, Yan Xiao-Song, Liu Rong, Lu Xin-Xin, Jiang Li, Wang Mei, Lin Ju-Fang. Measurements and analyses of uranium reaction rates on a depleted uranium shell with D-T neutrons. Acta Physica Sinica, 2013, 62(2): 022801. doi: 10.7498/aps.62.022801
[11]	Hua Yu-Chao, Dong Yuan, Cao Bing-Yang. Monte Carlo simulation of phonon ballistic diffusive heat conduction in silicon nanofilm. Acta Physica Sinica, 2013, 62(24): 244401. doi: 10.7498/aps.62.244401
[12]	Lan Mu, Xiang Gang, Gu Gang-Xu, Zhang Xi. A Monte Carlo simulation study on growth mechanism of horizontal nanowires on crystal surface. Acta Physica Sinica, 2012, 61(22): 228101. doi: 10.7498/aps.61.228101
[13]	Fan Xiao-Hui, Zhao Xing-Yu, Wang Li-Na, Zhang Li-Li, Zhou Heng-Wei, Zhang Jin-Lu, Huang Yi-Neng. Monte Carlo simulations of the relaxation dynamics of the spatial relaxation modes in the molecule-string model. Acta Physica Sinica, 2011, 60(12): 126401. doi: 10.7498/aps.60.126401
[14]	Chen Shan, Wu Qing-Yun, Chen Zhi-Gao, Xu Gui-Gui, Huang Zhi-Gao. Ferromagnetism of C doped ZnO: first-principles calculation and Monte Carlo simulation. Acta Physica Sinica, 2009, 58(3): 2011-2017. doi: 10.7498/aps.58.2011
[15]	Xiong Kai-Guo, Feng Guo-Lin, Hu Jing-Guo, Wan Shi-Quan, Yang Jie. Monte Carlo simulation of the record-breaking high temperature events of climate changes. Acta Physica Sinica, 2009, 58(4): 2843-2852. doi: 10.7498/aps.58.2843
[16]	Gao Fei, Ryoko Yamada, Mitsuo Watanabe, Liu Hua-Feng. Use of Monte Carlo simulations for the scatter events analysis of PET scanners. Acta Physica Sinica, 2009, 58(5): 3584-3591. doi: 10.7498/aps.58.3584
[17]	Xu Lan-Qing, Li Hui, Xiao Zheng-Ying. Discussion on backscattered photon numbers and their scattering events in a turbid media. Acta Physica Sinica, 2008, 57(9): 6030-6035. doi: 10.7498/aps.57.6030
[18]	He Qing-Fang, Xu Zheng, Liu De-Ang, Xu Xu-Rong. Monte Carlo simulation of the effect of impact ionization in thin-film electroluminescent devices. Acta Physica Sinica, 2006, 55(4): 1997-2002. doi: 10.7498/aps.55.1997
[19]	Wang Zhi-Jun, Dong Li-Fang, Shang Yong. Monte Carlo simulation of optical emission spectra in electron assisted chemical vapor deposition of diamond. Acta Physica Sinica, 2005, 54(2): 880-885. doi: 10.7498/aps.54.880
[20]	Wang Jian-Hua, Jin Chuan-En. Application of Monte Carlo simulation to the research of ions transport plasma sheaths of glow discharge. Acta Physica Sinica, 2004, 53(4): 1116-1122. doi: 10.7498/aps.53.1116

Catalog

Vol. 69, Issue 13 - 2020-07-05

Metrics

Abstract views: 11413
PDF Downloads: 207
Cited By: 0

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

Search

Article

留言板