Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:26:50.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Advanced Carbon-based Material as Space Radiation Shields

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Sanju Gupta ,
Rishi J. Patel  and
Nathaniel D. Smith
Sanju Gupta*
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Materials Science and Center of Applied Science and Engineering (CASE), Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield, MO 65804–0027, USA.
Rishi J. Patel
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Materials Science and Center of Applied Science and Engineering (CASE), Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield, MO 65804–0027, USA.
Nathaniel D. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Materials Science and Center of Applied Science and Engineering (CASE), Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield, MO 65804–0027, USA.
*
* E-mail address: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Carbon-based materials including microcrystalline diamond, nanocrystalline diamond, and carbon nanotubes films were prepared by microwave plasma-assisted chemical vapor deposition (MWCVD) technique. While the former were submitted to gamma radiation doses of 1, 5, and 20 Mrad, the latter to low energy electron beam of 30 keV or to 30 GeV/cm2) to study the radiation-induced structural transformation. The characterizations were performed prior to and after irradiation using Raman spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and X-ray diffraction, techniques. Microcrystalline diamond showed a dramatic modification in the structural properties only after a cumulative dose of 26 Mrad (2 Grad/cm2), while nanocrystalline carbon showed a relatively small but systematic transformation with increasing gamma radiation dose. The results indicate that nanocrystalline carbon tends to reach a state of saturation when submitted to 26 Mrad doses of gamma radiation, suggesting the possibility of fabricating radiation buffer materials that would undergo internal sp3 ⇔ sp2 inter-conversion while absorbing ionizing radiation without changing their average microstructure and protecting the device/material underneath. Single- and multi-walled nanotubes exhibited structural modifications after 5.5–8 hrs of continuous exposure to electron beam. The variation in the characteristic X-ray peaks for multi-walled and single-walled corresponding to intertube spacing and the high frequency Raman band around 1580 cm−1 (G band) are reflected in their corresponding spectra. The results indicate that there is an increase in the intertube spacing for multi-walled nanotubes due to electron irradiation. While single-wall nanotubes tends to ‘collapse’ after > 8 hours of exposure forming multi-wall nanotubes analyzed using scanning electron microscopy and Raman spectroscopy. These C materials can be employed for preventing space radiation from reaching sensitive materials and electronic devices at least for short term experiments and entitled them as ‘space radiation shields’.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 851: Symposium NN – Materials for Space Applications , 2004 , NN6.3
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Field, J. E., The Properties of Diamonds (Academic Press, London, 1979).Google Scholar
2. Gupta, S., Weiss, B. L., Weiner, B. R., Pilione, L., Badzian, A., and Morell, G., J. Appl. Phys. 92, 3311 (2002) and references therein.Google Scholar
3. Campbell, B. and Mainwood, A., Phys. Status Solidi A 181, 99 (2000).Google Scholar
4. Banhart, F., Rep. Prog. Phys. 62, 1181 (1999).Google Scholar
5. Li, J. and Banhart, F., Nano Lett. 4, 1143 (2004).Google Scholar
6. Banhart, F., Nano Lett. 1, 329 (2001);Google Scholar
Gupta, S., Smith, N. D., Patel, R. J., and Giedd, R. E., Missouri Association of Physics Teachers (MAPT), Nov. 06, 2004 Springfield, MO;Google Scholar
Gupta, S., Smith, N. D., and Patel, R. J., Appl. Phys. Lett. (Submitted Dec. 2004).Google Scholar
7. Wang, Y. Y., Gupta, S., and Nemanich, R. J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 85, 2601 (2004).Google Scholar
8. Marquardt, D. W., J. Soc. Indis. Appl. Math. 11, 431 (1963).Google Scholar
9. Campbell, B. and Mainwood, A., Phys. Status Solidi A 181, 99 (2000).Google Scholar
10. Ferrari, A. C. and Robertson, J., Phys. Rev. B 61, 14095 (2001).Google Scholar
11. Levy, P. W. and Kammerer, O. F., Phys. Rev. 100, 1787 (1955).Google Scholar
12. Zaiser, M. and Banhart, F., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3680 (1997).Google Scholar
13. Rao, A. M., Richter, E., Bandow, S., Chase, B., Eklund, P. C., Williams, K. A., Fang, S., Subbaswamy, K. R., Menon, M., Thess, A., and Smalley, R. E., Science, 275, 187 (1997).Google Scholar
14. Dresselhaus, M. S. and Eklund, P. C., Adv. Phys. 49, 705 (2000).Google Scholar
15. Thess, A., et. al. Science, 273, 483 (1996).Google Scholar