Theoretical study of doped porous silicon in cantor quasi periodic structure for gamma radiation detection

Abstract

This study looks at two photonic crystals that are similar to Cantor's and are separated by a thin layer of sensitive, porous silicon made of poly(ethylene oxide) nanocomposite and potassium iodide, which is used as a gamma indicator. Modifications in the distinct peak versus the irradiation dose track how the proposed indicator responds to radiation. The results demonstrate that gamma radiation alters the refractive index of the poly(ethylene oxide) nanocomposite, causing the distinct peaks to shift. The impact of doping of nanocomposite with potassium iodide, the porosity of silicon, and the cell's number is analyzed. Doping the sensitive nanocomposite with potassium iodide showed a negative effect. The proposed indicator recorded a high sensitivity of 0.218 nm/Gy (nm/Gy = nanometer/gray) for low gamma doses up to 100 Gy, and a moderated sensitivity of 0.13 nm/Gy for high gamma dose from 100 to 200 Gy. The suggested indicator demonstrated high sensitivity in low gamma detection.

Keywords: Cantor structure; Gamma radiation; Polymer films; Potassium iodide; Quasi-periodic.

Fig. 1

Schematic structure of CS-PC defected with nanocomposite of poly(ethylene oxide) doped with Potassium Iodide.

Fig. 2

Fitted and measured RIs of PNCEO at different doses (0 Gy, 100 Gy, and 200 Gy) by changing the concentration of KI in PNCEO from (A) 0%, (B) 2%, (C) 6%, (D) 10%, and (E) 15%.

Fig. 2

Fitted and measured RIs of PNCEO at different doses (0 Gy, 100 Gy, and 200 Gy) by changing the concentration of KI in PNCEO from (A) 0%, (B) 2%, (C) 6%, (D) 10%, and (E) 15%.

Fig. 3

RIs of PSi doped with PNCEO at different doses (0 Gy, 100 Gy, and 200 Gy) with changing the concentration of KI in PNCEO from (A) 0%, (B) 2%, (C) 6%, (D) 10%, and (E) 15%.

Fig. 3

RIs of PSi doped with PNCEO at different doses (0 Gy, 100 Gy, and 200 Gy) with changing the concentration of KI in PNCEO from (A) 0%, (B) 2%, (C) 6%, (D) 10%, and (E) 15%.

Fig. 4

The proposed CS-PC’s transmittance (A) with and without PSi doped with PNCEO defect (black line vs. red line) and when gamma dose is not present (B) with PSi doped with PNCEO defect at gamma doses of 0 Gy, 100 Gy, and 200 Gy.

Fig. 5

Transmittance of the proposed CS-PC with PSi doped with PNCEO defect for (A) porosity of 10%, (B) porosity of 15%, (C) porosity of 20%, (D) porosity of 25%, and (E) porosity of 30% at 0 Gy, 100 Gy and 200 Gy gamma doses (, , , and ).

Fig. 6

(A) Transmittance and FWHM at 0 Gy, (B) sensitivity and FoM, and (C) Q and LoD of the proposed CS-PC versus porosity of PSi defect doped with PNCEO (, , , and ).

Fig. 7

Transmittance of the proposed CS-PC with PSi doped with PNCEO defect for (A) , (B) , (C) , (D) , and (E) at 0 Gy, 100 Gy and 200 Gy gamma doses (, , , and ).

Fig. 8

(A) Transmittance and FWHM at 0 Gy, (B) sensitivity and FoM, and (C) Q and LoD of the proposed CS-PC versus N (, , , and ).

Fig. 9

Transmittance of the proposed CS-PC by changing the RIs of PSi doped with PNCEO defect from 3.04 (0 Gy) to 3.02, 3.40, 3.60, 3.80, 4.00, 4.20, 4.42 (100 Gy), 4.60, and 4.89 (200 Gy) at , , , , and .

Fig. 10

Transmittance of the proposed CS-PC by changing the RIs of PSi doped with PNCEO defect from 3.02 (0 Gy) to 3.02, 3.40, 3.60, 3.80, 4.00, 4.20, 4.41 (100 Gy), 4.60, and 4.88 (200 Gy) at , , , , and .