Skip to content
BY 4.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter Open Access October 26, 2023

Influence of the addition of WO3 on TeO2–Na2O glass systems in view of the feature of mechanical, optical, and photon attenuation

  • Hanan Al-Ghamdi , Sabina Yasmin EMAIL logo , Mohammad Ibrahim Abualsayed , Ashok Kumar EMAIL logo , Aljawhara H. Almuqrin and Shlair Ibrahim Mohammed
From the journal Open Chemistry

Abstract

A study was conducted to investigate how the addition of WO3 affects the mechanical, optical, and photon attenuation properties of TeO2–Na2O glass systems. In this study, four glass systems categorized as W5, W10, W15, and W20 were studied to evaluate the impact of WO3 on TeO2–Na2O glass systems in view of the feature of mechanical, optical, and photon attenuation. The rising values of elastic moduli suggest that increasing WO3 on TeO2–Na2O glass systems makes the glassy structure more stable. Incorporating WO3 into TeO2–Na2O glass systems results in an increased energy band gap, rising from 2.83 to 2.95 eV. This phenomenon, in turn, leads to a decrease in the refractive index, dielectric constant, and optical dielectric constant values from 2.444 to 2.411, 5.975 to 5.811, and 4.975 to 4.811, respectively. While the linear attenuation coefficient (LAC) of the examined glass systems (W5, W10, W15, and W20) displayed a comparable pattern, the LAC value of glass sample W20 stood out as the highest among them. However, due to the addition of WO3 on the TeO2–Na2O glass system, at a lower energy region from 0.0284 to 0.06 MeV, there was a little variation among the mass attenuation coefficients of these glass systems studied herein, but a negligible variation was found from 0.662 to 2.51 MeV. The studied glass sample W20 with the highest amount of WO3 (20 mol%) on the TeO2–Na2O glass system displayed the lowest half-value layer. However, glass samples W5, W10, and W15 exposed 1.29, 1.07, and 1.03 times higher values of mean free path than W20. In addition, the values of the half-value layer were compared with the literature data of WO3–MoO3–TeO2, BaO–Li2O–B2O3, and CaF2–BaO–P2O5 glass systems. Studied glass sample W20 showed the maximum shielding performance from energy 0.284 to 2.51 MeV.

1 Introduction

Recently, ionizing radiations have been used in diverse applications such as aerospace, medical science, nuclear power plants, material analysis, scientific research, industries, and other applications [1,2,3,4]. It is well known that gamma photon has high penetration ability; hence, the use of photons in our daily life causes significant damage through biochemical changes in living cells, which affect human health [5]. One of the appropriate ways of reducing the radiation effects is to use an effective radiation shield [6,7,8,9]. For this reason, it is an important issue to identify the characteristics of the incident photons and the interaction process between the incident photons and the absorbing material for nuclear engineers and radiation shielding developers [10]. Lead, a dense material with a high atomic number, is a common shielding material for radiation protection since the last few decades. Due to the toxicity of this material, a number of literature data showed that excessive use of lead is harmful to the human body. Moreover, availability, cost-effectiveness, and easy method of manufacture make concretes a good attenuator against ionizing radiation [11,12]. Yet, those aforementioned materials have several disadvantages such as opaque to visibility, toxicity (for lead), and also heavyweight, glassy materials, ceramics, alloys, and polymers are used as promising radiation shielding materials, presently [13,14,15,16]. Now, researchers have started establishing a correlation between the optical, mechanical, and radiation shielding performance of different glass systems to get the best glass systems [17,18].

Due to their distinctive combination of qualities, including transparency, durability, and ease of manufacture, glasses have been intensively explored as gamma radiation shielding components in the past few years. The efficiency of glasses as a shield from gamma radiation has been demonstrated by previous studies. The usefulness of glasses as a barrier against gamma radiation is dependent on numerous variables such as composition, density, and thickness. Research has demonstrated that glasses composed of elements with a high atomic number (Z) have superior gamma radiation shielding properties compared to glasses composed of elements with a low Z. In addition, it has been shown that glasses with larger densities and thicknesses are more efficient at reducing the effects of gamma radiation [19,20].

Tungsten oxide has been the subject of significant research due to its peculiar qualities, such as excellent electrochromic, photo-chromic, gas chromic, gas sensor, photo-catalyst, and photoluminescence properties [21,22,23]. Tungsten oxide has been utilized in various technological advancements, such as “smart windows,” anti-glare rearview mirrors for automobiles, optical recording devices, solid-state gas sensors, and photonic crystals [23,24,25]. Tungsten oxide glasses possess promising possibilities for a variety of applications, including amorphous semiconductors, infrared transmission components, thermal and mechanical sensors, and reflecting windows [24,25,26]. The tungsten ion may exist in various valence states, which makes its doping a potential strategy to change the structure and optical characteristics of host glasses.

TeO2-based glasses are favorable due to their low melting temperature and excellent optical properties. Due to these interesting physical and chemical features, TeO2-based glasses have promising applications in many aspects of our lives and have been used in many optical devices such as optical switching devices, erasable recording media, and other devices [27,28,29]. Only TeO2 cannot form any structure or shape to be used as a shield, but it can be utilized as an additive by adding certain kinds of heavy metal oxides (HMO) or alkali oxide to get a better radiation shield. To prepare any radiation shield, it is convenient to use HMOs on glass composition to enhance the effective atomic number [30,31].

Practically, when TeO2 is added with any HMO such as WO3, then it can be expected that a lower value of half-value layer glass structure will be formed, which will provide better radiation protection [32,33,34].

Despite the importance of experimental techniques to validate any scientific research, the use of theoretical and numerical methods is now rapidly growing for understanding numerous physical situations and providing solutions.

Additionally, the use of theoretical and numerical methods for evaluating the radiation protection performance of any newly developed materials has a few benefits, such as getting the information of radiation shielding material’s characteristics within a short time easily, as well as no need to use radioactive sources that is why it can reduce the exposed time of radiation workers in the field of developing radiological protection components [35,36].

For this reason, in this study, Phy-X software has been used to evaluate the radiation shielding capability of TeO2–Na2O glass systems with the contamination of numerous amounts of (5–20) mol% of WO3.

However, Kumari et al. [37] reported the physical and structural properties of these considered glass systems. In their research, the optical properties of those considered glass systems were measured using the direct band gap energy value. Therefore, in this present work, extensive optical properties of these considered glass systems have been studied in detail using the indirect band gap energy values.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Details of the studied glass samples

The composition and the density of these studied glass samples were taken from the literature of Kumari et al. [37]. Depending on the amount of WO3 on TeO2–Na2O glass systems, samples were coded as W5, W10, W15, and W20:

W 5 : 85 TeO 2 5 WO 3 10 Na 2 O ( density = 4.91 g/cm 3 ) ,

W 10 : 80 TeO 2 10 WO 3 10 Na 2 O ( density = 4.97 g/cm 3 ) ,

W 15 : 75 TeO 2 15 WO 3 10 Na 2 O ( density = 5.07 g/cm 3 ) ,

W 20 : 70 TeO 2 20 WO 3 10 Na 2 O ( density = 5.12 g/cm 3 ) .

2.2 Mechanical properties

Makishima–Mackenzie’s theory [38,39] is a model used to describe the mechanical properties of glasses. According to this theory, the mechanical behavior of glasses can be understood by considering the energy landscape of the glassy structure. The theory suggests that the mechanical strength of a glass is related to the energy barrier that must be overcome for an atomic rearrangement to occur. When a glass is subjected to external stress, such as tension or compression, the atomic rearrangements that occur can lead to the formation of micro-cracks or voids, which can eventually lead to fracture. Makishima–Mackenzie’s theory predicts that the strength of a glass depends on the activation energy for these atomic rearrangements. Higher activation energy implies a higher energy barrier and therefore a higher mechanical strength. Furthermore, the theory also suggests that the mechanical properties of glasses are influenced by factors such as the glass composition, cooling rate, and thermal history. These factors affect the energy landscape of the glassy structure and can alter the activation energy for atomic rearrangements.

Average cross-link density ( n c ̅ ):

(1) n c ̅ = x i ( n c ) i ( N c ) i x i ( N c ) i where ( n c = n f 2 ) ,

where n f is the coordination number.

The number of bonds per unit volume of the glasses (n b):

(2) n b = N A V m ( n f ) i x i .

Atomic packing density V t

(3) V t = 1 V m V i x i .

Interatomic bonding energy G t

(4) G t = G i x i ,

where V i and G i are the atomic packing densities and the interatomic bond energies of the components of the glasses [40].

Overall, Makishima–Mackenzie’s theory provides a useful framework for understanding the mechanical properties of glasses and can help guide the design of new glass compositions with tailored mechanical behavior. The formulae for Young’s modulus (E), bulk modulus (B), shear modulus (G), longitudinal modulus (L), Poisson’s ratio (σ), and hardness (H) are described in Makishima–Mackenzie’s theory [38,39].

2.3 Optical properties

The optical properties of glasses play a crucial role in various fields, from basic research to industrial applications. The development of new glasses with specific optical properties has led to the creation of novel optical devices that have revolutionized the way we interact with the world. The formulations for the calculations of optical parameters have been described in our previous reporting [41,42,43], which is described in the following.

The refractive index is another important optical property of glasses that determines the degree of bending of light rays as they pass through the material. The refractive index of glasses is determined by the composition and structure of the glass, and it is used in various optical devices such as lenses, prisms, and optical fibers. Refractive index (n) can be obtained as follows:

(5) n 2 1 n 2 + 1 = 1 E g 20 .

Dielectric constant (ε):

(6) ε = n 2 .

Optical dielectric constant (pdp/dt):

(7) p d p d t = ( ε 1 ) = n 2 .

Molar refractivity (R m):

(8) R m = n 2 1 n 2 + 1 x V m .

Reflection loss (R L):

(9) R L = n 1 n + 1 2 .

Transparency is one of the most crucial optical properties of glasses, which refers to the ability of a material to allow light to pass through it without significant absorption or scattering. High transparency is essential for optical applications, such as lenses, windows, and displays, as it ensures maximum light transmission and minimal light reflection or absorption.

Transmission coefficient (T) can be obtained as follows:

(10) T = 2 n n 2 + 1 .

Molar polarizability ( α m ) :

(11) α m = 3 4 π N A × R m .

Metallization character (M):

(12) M = 1 R m V m .

Electronic polarizability (α e):

(13) α e = 3 ( n 2 1 ) 4 π N A ( n 2 + 2 )

The other formulae for refractive index-based metallization criterion (M (n)), optical energy-based metallization criterion (M (E g)), optical electronegativity (χ*), linear dielectric susceptibility (χ (1)), nonlinear optical susceptibility (χ 3), and nonlinear refractive index (n 2) are described in standard texts [41,42,43].

2.4 Gamma-ray shielding properties

The radiation shielding parameters of these studied glasses were obtained using the Phy-X/PSD computer program [44] based on the primary data reported elsewhere [45,46,47]. Exposure to ionizing radiation has recently been a growing issue in a variety of spheres of modern life, making theoretical radiation shielding investigations increasingly important. The high mass attenuation coefficient (MAC) of glass materials, which determines their capacity to attenuate gamma photons by scattering and absorption, makes them appealing choices for radiation shielding. As a result, there has been a considerable trend in designing new glass systems with superior radiation shielding qualities and in comprehending the basic mechanisms behind radiation attenuation in glass materials. In this sense, the purpose of our study is to examine the impact of including WO3 to TeO2–Na2O glass systems on variables such as the mass and linear attenuation coefficients (LACs), with a particular emphasis on the potential of these materials to act as radiation shielding materials.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Mechanical properties

Raising the concentration of WO3 on the studied glass systems enhanced the value of average cross-link density (n c) from 2.455 to 2.727.

Both the parameters’ value network stiffness and complexity were increased according to the growing value of average cross-link density (n c). The n b value of these studied glasses increased from 8.287 × 1022 to 8.635 × 1022 cm−3 due to the addition of WO3 (5–20) mol% on the studied glass systems. The values of n b that go upwards point to a more interconnected network [48].

The addition of an increasing amount of WO3 on the studied glass samples lifted the value of the number of bonds per unit volume (n b). As an illustration, the values of the number of bonds per unit volume were W5 (8.287 × 1022), W10 (8.386 × 1022), W15 (8.552 × 1022), and W20 (8.635 × 1022). This could result from an increase in the number of non-bridging oxygens as the WO3 concentration rises [49].

Literature data showed that the replacement of WO3 in place of TeO2 raised the density of the samples from 4.91 to 5.12 g/cm3 [26]. Table 1 represents the list of mechanical characteristics. The parameters interatomic bonding energy (G t) and atomic packing density (V t) influence the value of elastic moduli. Figure 1 represents the variation of the mechanical parameters because of the addition of numerous percentages of WO3 in the studied glass systems. The value of Young’s modulus (E) represents the flexing ability of that material, which can be measured by applying stress to that material. Due to the value of low-intensity tension, the value of Young’s modulus (E) rises. Consequently, the acoustic wave travels at a quicker rate when the material is more compressed. The addition of WO3 (5–20) mol% on the studied glass systems enhanced the value of Young’s (E), bulk (B), shear (G), and longitudinal (L) moduli from (49.6–53.6 GPa), (28.1–31.5 GPa), (22.1–23.5 GPa), and (57.4–62.9 GPa), respectively. These rising values of these moduli suggest that addition of the increasing amount of WO3 on the studied glasses made them more stable on the purpose of the glassy structure. A study was done on the propagation of ultrasound waves on tellurium glasses, which showed that the addition of a raising amount of WO3 on the glass systems enhances the value of their elastic moduli [50].

Table 1

Mechanical properties of the studied glasses

Mechanical parameters Glass samples
W5 W10 W15 W20
n c (cm−3) 2.455 2.545 2.636 2.727
n b 8.287 × 1022 8.386 × 1022 8.552 × 1022 8.635 × 1022
V t (cm3/mol) 0.473 0.478 0.488 0.492
G t (kJ/cm3) 12.537 12.702 12.867 13.032
E (GPa) 49.6 50.806 52.44 53.577
B (GPa) 28.078 29.076 30.581 31.517
G (GPa) 22.01 22.481 23.093 23.542
L (GPa) 57.424 59.051 61.372 62.907
σ 0.207 0.21 0.215 0.218
H (GPa) 4.022 4.064 4.098 4.142
Figure 1 
                  Variation of mechanical properties for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 1

Variation of mechanical properties for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

Due to the increasing contamination of WO3 on these studied glasses (W5–W20),the limit of Poison ratio (σ) from 0.207 to 0.218, which indicates a significant degree of cross-linking [51].

Moreover, addition of the increasing amount of WO3 on these studied glasses enhanced the value of hardness (H) from 4.02 to 4.14 GPa as well as increased the value of stiffness and interconnectivity [52].

3.2 Optical properties

Addition of numerous amounts of WO3 on the studied glass samples enhanced the range of band gap energy from 2.83 to 2.95 eV [37]. Although it is known that the addition of WO3 and Na2O enhances the non-bridging oxygens in the network, as the concentration of Na2O was the same in all the studied glass samples, Na2O did not have that much effect to change the energy band gap values. However, the addition of WO3 to the investigated samples increased the density of the studied glass samples, which reduced trap centers, resulting in the incrementation of the band gap energy value.

Furthermore, the indirect band gap energy values that were used to obtain further optical parameters are summarized in Table 2. In Figure 2, some optical parameters are presented due to the addition of numerous amounts of WO3 on the studied glasses. Due to the enhancement of the band gap energy, the value of n, ε, and p d p / d t fluctuated (2.444–2.411), (5.975–5.811), and (4.975 to 4.811), respectively. There were minimal variations in the value of reflection loss (0.176–0.171) and transmission coefficient (0.701–0.708) with the numerous concentrations of WO3 on the studied glasses. However, the value of reflection loss followed the decreasing trend – W5 > W10 > W15 > W20, whereas the transmission coefficient maintained the increasing trend as – W5 < W10 < W15 < W20.

Table 2

Optical parameters (UV parameters) of studied glasses

Optical parameters Glass samples
W5 W10 W15 W20
Indirect band gap energy (eV) 2.83 2.85 2.92 2.95
n 2.444 2.439 2.419 2.411
ε 5.975 5.947 5.851 5.811
p d p d t 4.975 4.947 4.851 4.811
R L 0.176 0.175 0.172 0.171
T 0.701 0.702 0.706 0.708
R m (cm3/mol) 19.496 19.673 19.582 19.764
α m × 10−24 cm3 7.733 7.803 7.767 7.839
αe × 1024 8.855 8.836 8.771 8.743
M 0.376 0.377 0.382 0.384
M (E g) 0.071 0.071 0.073 0.074
M (n) 0.376 0.377 0.382 0.384
χ (1) 0.396 0.394 0.386 0.383
χ* 0.761 0.766 0.785 0.793
χ 3 × 10−16 (esu) 1.569 1.595 1.685 1.725
n 2 optical × 10−15 (esu) 2.419 2.464 2.625 2.696
Figure 2 
                  Variation of optical properties for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 2

Variation of optical properties for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

The addition of WO3 on the glasses did not create a significant variation in the values of R m, α m, and α e. As an illustration, the value of R m and α m increased from 19.496 to 19.764 cm3/mol and from 7.733 × 10−24 to 7.839 × 10−24 cm3, respectively, with the addition of numerous amounts of WO3. However, the value of electronic polarizability (α e) was decreased (8.855 × 1024–8.743 × 1024) because of the addition of WO3 (5–20 mol%) on the studied glass samples.

The values of metallization (M), M (E g), and M (n) were less than one, which indicates that all the studied glass samples were non-metallic.

The value of optical electronegativity (χ *) lessens from 0.761 to 0.793 due to the addition of greater amounts of WO3 on these studied glasses. As the higher value of optical electronegativity (χ *) reduces the probability of brittleness, it can be stated that the addition of bigger amounts of WO3 on these studied glasses decreases the brittleness of these studied glasses. Furthermore, the values of linear susceptibility (χ (1)), nonlinear refractive index (n 2), and third-order nonlinear susceptibility (χ (3)) were also calculated for these studied glasses and presented in Table 2. The fluctuation of the values χ (1), n 2, and χ (3) was (0.396 to 0.383), (1.569 × 10−16 to 1.725 × 10−16 esu), and (2.419 × 10−15 to 2.696 × 10−15 esu), respectively. The value of χ (1) was decreased, whereas χ (3) and n 2 were increased according to the addition of the greatest amount of WO3 on these studied glasses.

3.3 Gamma-ray shielding parameters

The LAC is a chief feature for identifying the radiation shielding proficiency of any absorbing material [2,8,19]. In this study, four glass samples W5, W10, W15, and W20 were prepared by mixing numerous amounts of TeO2, WO3, and fixed amounts of Na2O. The discrepancy in the value of LAC of these studied glass systems is represented in Figure 3. The values of the LAC of W5, W10, W15, and W20 glasses followed an analogous drift. However, from Figure 3, the addition of WO3 on the TeO2–Na2O glass system enhances the values of LAC. That means the addition of a greater amount of WO3 enhanced the shielding ability of these studied glass systems against gamma radiation.

Figure 3 
                  LAC for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 3

LAC for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

Figure 4 displays the discrepancy in the LAC of these studied glass systems for Cs-137 and Co-60 energy lines. It is seen that for the Cs-137 energy line, studied glass samples W10, W15, and W20 showed 1.21, 1.25, and 1.28 times greater LAC values than W5. Again, studied glass samples W10, W15, and W20 displayed 1.19, 1.23, and 1.25 times superior values of LAC for the Co-60 energy line.

Figure 4 
                  LAC for the selected glasses for Cs-137 and Co-60 (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 4

LAC for the selected glasses for Cs-137 and Co-60 (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

MAC values of the prepared glass systems from energy 0.28 to 2.51 MeV are presented in Figure 5. From energy limit 0.28 to 2.51 MeV, the values of MAC fell according to the increase in the energy as the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering occur at this energy region. The MAC values at 0.28 and 2.52 MeV were W5 (0.18, 0.04), W10 (0.19, 0.04), W15 (0.20, 0.04), and W20 (0.21, 0.04) cm2/g. In addition, it is found that at low energy (from 0.28 to 0.66 MeV), the values of MAC of these studied glass samples are in the following order: W5 < W10 < W15 < W20, which happens due to the enhancement of WO3 on the studied glass systems. However, from 0.662 to 2.51 MeV energy range, studied glass samples exposed almost the same MAC values.

Figure 5 
                  MAC for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 5

MAC for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

Figure 6 shows the values of HVL of the studied glass samples at energy 0.28–2.51 MeV. From this figure, it can be observed that increasing the WO3 on the considered glass samples causes a decrease in the HVL. The density of the studied glass systems varies from 4.91 to 5.12 g/cm3 because of the contamination of WO3 content from 5 to 20 mol%. All the studied glass samples W5, W10, W15, and W20 were exposed alike, with an increasing trend from energy 0.28 to 2.51 MeV. In addition, the studied glass sample W20, attaining the highest amount of WO3 (20 mol%), showed the lowest value of HVL among the other studied samples.

Figure 6 
                  HVL for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 6

HVL for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

Mean free path (MFP) is the average distance between two photons’ probable conflicts on absorbing material, which is a virtuous pointer for identifying the shielding proficiency of that absorbing material. Hence, the lesser MFP value providing absorber is requisite for better shielding ability. Figure 7 shows graphical representation of the MFP values of the samples as a function of incident photon energy. Taken as a whole, the MFP value of these studied glass samples exhibits a similar trend for the energy from 0.28 to 2.51 MeV. Glass samples W5, W10, and W15 showed 1.29, 1.07, and 1.03 time’s greater value of MFP than W20. In addition, the studied glass sample W20, attaining a higher amount of WO3 (20 mol%), showed the lowest value of MFP. The studied glass sample W20, containing the largest amount of WO3 (20 mol%), expressed the minimum values of MFP, which signifies the probability of the highest shielding capability from hazardous ionizing radiation than the rest of the studied samples.

Figure 7 
                  MFP for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 7

MFP for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

The effective atomic numbers (Z eff) of the W5, W10, W15, and W20 glasses were calculated using Phy-X software and presented in Figure 8. It is found that from energy 0.284 to 1.333 MeV, effective atomic numbers of the studied glass samples decreased rapidly; yet, after that, it started to increase. For example, the values of Z eff were W5 (22.27, 23.11), W10 (22.53, 23.39), W15 (22.78, 23.66), and W20 (23.02, 23.93) at energy 1.33 and 2.51 MeV, respectively. A miniature increase was found in the value of effective atomic numbers of the studied glass samples due to the addition of the increasing amount of WO3. Studied glass samples maintained the following increasing trend of the value of effective atomic numbers – W5(5 mol% WO3) < W10 (10 mol% WO3) < W15 (15 mol% WO3) < W20 (20 mol% WO3). It is well known that greater values of Z eff of any composite materials can easily reduce the incident photons compared with the composite of lower Z eff. Herein, it was found that a greater amount of WO3 holding sample W20 showed the highest value of Z eff. That means it can be stated that the addition of WO3 enhances the shielding ability of the studied glass systems. Moreover, the values of Z eff of the studied samples revealed a decreasing pattern with the increase of incident photon energy. It happens because of the dependency of the photoelectric effect on these cross-sections [53,54,55].

Figure 8 
                  
                     Z
                     eff for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 8

Z eff for the selected glasses (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

Figure 9 represents a comparative assessment of the value of HVL of the studied glass systems [(90 − x)TeO2x WO3−10Na2O; when x = 5, 10, 15, and 20] with the literature glass systems [10WO3−(50 − x)MoO3−(x + 40)TeO2; when x = 40, 30, 20, 10] at energy 0.347 MeV [56]. Here, it is clear that except for sample W5, other studied samples W10, W15, and W20 showed very close values of half-value layers.

Figure 9 
                  The assessment of HVL among the selected glasses (W5–W20) with WO3–MoO3–TeO2 at energy 0.347 MeV (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 9

The assessment of HVL among the selected glasses (W5–W20) with WO3–MoO3–TeO2 at energy 0.347 MeV (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

Figure 10 displays a comparative evaluation of the value of HVL of the literature glass systems [(20 + x) 10BaO–(20 − x)Li2O–60B2O3; when x = 5, 10, 15, 20] with studied glass systems [(90 − x)TeO2x WO3 − 10Na2O; when x = 5, 10, 15, and 20] at energy 0.347 MeV [57]. It is seen that the studied glass sample W5, W10, W15, and W20 showed significantly lower value of HVL than the glass systems [(20 + x)10BaO–(20 − x)Li2O–60B2O3; when x = 5, 10, 15, 20].

Figure 10 
                  The assessment of HVL among the selected glasses (W5–W20) with BaO–Li2O–B2O3 at energy 0.347 MeV (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 10

The assessment of HVL among the selected glasses (W5–W20) with BaO–Li2O–B2O3 at energy 0.347 MeV (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

A comparative charge of the value of HVL of the studied glass systems [(90 − x)TeO2xWO3–10 Na2O; when x = 5, 10, 15, and 20] with the literature glass systems [xCaF2−(50 − x)BaO−50P2O5; when x = 2, 4, 6, 8, 10] for energy at energy 0.347 MeV is presented in Figure 11 [58]. Studied glass samples W5, W10, W15, and W20 exhibited pointedly lower value of HVL than the glass systems [(20 + x)10 BaO–(20 − x)Li2O–60B2O3; when x = 5, 10, 15, 20].

Figure 11 
                  The assessment of HVL among the selected glasses (W5–W20) with CaF2–BaO–P2O5 at energy 0.347 MeV (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).
Figure 11

The assessment of HVL among the selected glasses (W5–W20) with CaF2–BaO–P2O5 at energy 0.347 MeV (lines in the plot are drawn as guides to the eyes).

Eventually, it can be said that for the purpose of radiation shielding, studied glass samples W5, W10, W15, and W20 are more suitable than the glass systems [(20 + x)10BaO–(20 − x)Li2O–60B2O3; when x = 5, 10, 15, 20] and [(20 + x)10BaO–(20−x)Li2O–60B2O3; when x = 5, 10, 15, 20].

4 Conclusion

The influence of the addition of WO3 on the TeO2–Na2O glass systems in regard to the mechanical, optical, and photon attenuation characteristics was studied. Makishima–Mackenzie’s model was used to measure the mechanical properties of the glasses. The mounting values of the elastic moduli indicate that the accumulation of increasing amounts of WO3 on TeO2–Na2O glass systems makes the glassy structure more stable. Hence, the addition of WO3 on TeO2–Na2O glass systems enhances the band gap energy from 2.83 to 2.95 eV that declines the value of refractive index and optical dielectric constant values from 2.444 to 2.411 and 4.975 to 4.811, respectively. The value of LAC of these studied glass systems TeO2–WO3–Na2O (W5, W10, W15, and W20) tracked a similar inclination, whereas studied glass sample W20 provided the highest value among other studied glass samples. Studied glass systems W10, W15, and W20 revealed 1.21, 1.25, and 1.28 times greater LAC values than W5 at energy line Cs-137. However, due to the addition of WO3 on the TeO2–Na2O glass system, at lower energy region from 0.0284 to 0.06 MeV, there was a little variation among the values of MAC of these glass systems studied herein, but a negligible variation was found for the energy region 0.662 to 2.51 MeV. In addition, the studied glass sample W20 containing a higher amount of WO3 (20 mol%) on the TeO2–Na2O glass system boosts the density that strengthens the photon conflicts and results in a lesser value of HVL and MFP. Noteworthily, studied glass samples maintained the growing trend of effective atomic numbers because of holding a massive amount of WO3. At energy 0.347 MeV, the studied glass systems TeO2–WO3–Na2O (W5, W10, W15, and W20 showed significantly lower HVL than the glass systems BaO–Li2O–B2O3 and CaF2–BaO–P2O5. In the energy region 0.0284 to 2.51 MeV, the W20 sample showed the supreme shielding performance. In the end, it can be stated that additives WO3 on TeO2–Na2O glass systems boost the mechanical and shielding ability.

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project number (PNURSP2023R28), Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

  1. Funding information: The work was financially supported by Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Supporting Project number (PNURSP2023R28).

  2. Author contributions: H. A. – Writing, editing, and proofreading, funding acquisition, S. Y. data analysis; proof correction. M. I. A. – Writing, editing, and proofreading; conceptualization, writing original draft. A. K. – Writing original draft; validation, conceptualization; data analysis. A. H. A. – Writing, editing, and proofreading, funding acquisition. S. I. M. – Conceptualization, writing original draft.

  3. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no known conflicts of interest.

  4. Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

  5. Data availability statement: The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

[1] Dong M, Xue X, Yang H, Li Z. Highly cost-effective shielding composite made from vanadium slag and boron-rich slag and its properties. Radiat Phys Chem. 2017;141:239–44.10.1016/j.radphyschem.2017.07.023Search in Google Scholar

[2] Kamislioglu M. An investigation into gamma radiation shielding parameters of the (Al:Si) and (Al + Na):Si-doped international simple glasses (ISG) used in nuclear waste management, deploying Phy-X/PSD and SRIM software. J Mater Sci Mater. 2021;32:12690–704.10.1007/s10854-021-05904-8Search in Google Scholar

[3] Tekin HO, Cavli B, Altunsoy EE, Manici T, Ozturk C, Karakas HM. An investigation on radiation protection and shielding properties of 16 slice computed tomography (CT) facilities. Int J Comp Exp Sci Engg. 2018;4(2):37–40.10.22399/ijcesen.408231Search in Google Scholar

[4] Akkurt I, Alomari A, Imamoglu MY, Ekmekçi I. Medical radiation shielding in terms of effective atomic numbers and electron densities of some glasses. Radiat Phys Chem. 2023;206:110767.10.1016/j.radphyschem.2023.110767Search in Google Scholar

[5] Waheed F, İmamoğlu M, Karpuz N, Ovalioğlu H. Simulation of neutrons shielding properties for some medical materials. Int J Comp Exp Sci Eng. 2022;8(1):5–8. 10.22399/ijcesen.1032359.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Sayyed MI. Investigation of Radiation shielding features of lithium cadmium silicate glasses. Silicon. 10.1007/s12633-023-02616-y.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Sayyed MI, Lakshminarayana G. Structural, thermal, optical features and shielding parameters investigations of optical glasses for gamma radiation shielding and defense applications. J Non-Cryst Solids. 2018;487:53–9.10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2018.02.014Search in Google Scholar

[8] Sayyed MI. The role of Bi2O3 on radiation shielding characteristics of ternary bismuth tellurite glasses. Optik. 2022;270:169973.10.1016/j.ijleo.2022.169973Search in Google Scholar

[9] Malidarre RB, Akkurt İ, Gunoglu K, Akyildirim H. Fast neutrons shielding properties for HAP-Fe2O3 composite materials. Int J Comp Exp Sci Engg. 2021;7(3):143–5. 10.22399/ijcesen.1012039.Search in Google Scholar

[10] Abualsayed MI. Radiation attenuation attributes for BaO-TiO2- SiO2-GeO2 glass series: a comprehensive study using Phy-X software. Radiochim Acta. 2023;111(3):211–6.10.1515/ract-2022-0095Search in Google Scholar

[11] Gökç HS, Canbaz-Öztürk B, Çam NF, Andiç-Çakır Ö. Gamma-ray attenuation coefficients and transmission thickness of high consistency heavy weight concrete containing mineral admixture. Cem Concr Compos. 2018;92:56–9.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2018.05.015Search in Google Scholar

[12] Gökçe HS, Yalçınkaya Ç, Tuyan M. Optimization of reactive powder concrete by means of barite agregate for neutrons and gamma rays. Const Build Mater. 2018;189:470–7.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.09.022Search in Google Scholar

[13] Sayyed MI, Almuqrin AH, Kumar A, Jecong JFM, Akkurt I. Optical, mechanical properties of TeO2-CdO-PbO-B2O3 glass systems and radiation shielding investigation using EPICS2017 library. Optik. 2021;242:167342.10.1016/j.ijleo.2021.167342Search in Google Scholar

[14] Kaewjaeng S, Kothan S, Chaiphaksa W, Chanthima N, Rajaramakrishna R, Kim HJ, et al. High transparency La2O3-CaO-B2O3-SiO2 glass for diagnosis x-rays shielding material application. Radiat Phys Chem. 2019;160:41–7.10.1016/j.radphyschem.2019.03.018Search in Google Scholar

[15] Abualsayed MI. Effect of tungsten on radiation attenuation features of yWO3–(90 − y)TeO2–10Na2O glasses. Radiochim Acta. 2023;111(3):225–30.10.1515/ract-2022-0101Search in Google Scholar

[16] Naseer KA, Marimuthu K, Mahmoud KA, Sayyed MI. Impact of Bi2O3 modifier concentration on barium–zincborate glasses: physical, structural, elastic, and radiation-shielding properties. Eur Phys J Plus. 2021;136:116.10.1140/epjp/s13360-020-01056-6Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[17] Mann KS, Mann SS. Py-MLBUF: Development of an online-platform for gamma-ray shielding calculations and investigations. Annals of Nuclear Energy. 2021;150:107845.10.1016/j.anucene.2020.107845Search in Google Scholar

[18] Abouhaswa AS, Kavaz E. A novel B2O3-Na2O-BaO-HgO glass system: Synthesis, physical, optical and nuclear shielding features. Cer Int. 2020;46:16166–77.10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.03.172Search in Google Scholar

[19] Sayyed MI, Mhareb MHA, Alajerami YSM, Mahmoud KA, Imheidat MA, Alshahri F, et al. Optical and radiation shielding features for a new series of borate glass samples. Optik. 2021;239:166790.10.1016/j.ijleo.2021.166790Search in Google Scholar

[20] Chanthima N, Kaewkhao J, Limkitjaroenporn P, Tuscharoen S, Kothan S, Tungjai M, et al. Development of BaO–ZnO–B2O3 glasses as a radiation shielding material. Rad Phys Chem. 2017;137:72–7.10.1016/j.radphyschem.2016.03.015Search in Google Scholar

[21] Kreidl NJ. Recent applications of glass science. J Non-Cryst Sol. 1990;123:377–84.10.1016/0022-3093(90)90810-9Search in Google Scholar

[22] Avellaneda CO, Bulhões LOS. Photochromic properties of WO3 and WO3:X (X = Ti, Nb, Ta and Zr) thin films. SolStatIon. 2003;165:117–21.10.1016/j.ssi.2003.08.023Search in Google Scholar

[23] Lee SH, Cheong HM, Liu P, Smith D, Tracy CE, Mascanrenhas A, et al. Gasochromic mechanism in WO3 thin films based on Raman spectroscopic studies. J Appl Phys. 2000;88:3076–8.10.1063/1.1287407Search in Google Scholar

[24] György E, Socol G, Mihailescu IN, Ducu C, Ciuca S. Structural and optical characterization of WO3 thin films for gas sensor applications. J Appl Phys. 2005;97:093527.10.1063/1.1889246Search in Google Scholar

[25] Gondal MA, Hameed A, Yamani ZH, Suwaiyan A. Laser induced photo-catalytic oxidation/splitting of water over a-Fe2O3, WO3, TiO2 and NiO catalysts: activity comparison. Chem Phys Lett. 2004;385:111–5.10.1016/j.cplett.2003.12.066Search in Google Scholar

[26] Feng M, Pan AL, Zhang HR, Li ZA, Liu F, Liu HW, et al. Strong photoluminescence of nanostructured crystalline tungsten oxide thin films. Appl Phys Lett. 2005;86:141901.10.1063/1.1898434Search in Google Scholar

[27] Issa SAM, Kumar A, Sayyed MI, Dong MG, Elmahroug Y. Mechanical and gamma-ray shielding properties of TeO2-ZnO-NiO glasses. Mater Chem Phys. 2018;212:12–20.10.1016/j.matchemphys.2018.01.058Search in Google Scholar

[28] Sibirkin AA, Fedotova IG, Karzanov VV. Glass-forming region and optical properties of TeO2 – MoO3 – La2O3 glasses. J Non-Cryst Sol. 2022;580:121387.10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2021.121387Search in Google Scholar

[29] Santos FA, Figueiredo MS, Barbano EC, Misoguti L, Lima SM, Andrade LHC, et al. Influence of lattice modifier on the nonlinear refractive index of tellurite glass. Cer Int. 2017;43:15201–4.10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.08.054Search in Google Scholar

[30] Sharma A, Sayyed MI, Agar O, Tekin HO. Simulation of shielding parameters for TeO2-WO3-GeO2 glasses using FLUKA code. Res Phys. 2019;13:102199.10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102199Search in Google Scholar

[31] Kavaz E, Ghanim EH, Abouhaswa AS. Optical, structural and nuclear radiation security properties of newly fabricated V2O5-SrO-PbO glass system. J Non-Cryst Sol. 2020;538:120045.10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2020.120045Search in Google Scholar

[32] Oto B, Kavaz E, Durak H, Aras A, Madak Z. Effect of addition of molybdenum on photon and fast neutron radiation shielding properties in ceramics. Cer Int. 2019;45:23681–9.10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.08.082Search in Google Scholar

[33] Cheewasukhanont W, Limkitjaroenporn P, Kothan S, Kedkaew C, Kaewkhao J. The effect of particle size on radiation shielding properties for bismuth borosilicate glass. Rad Phys Chem. 2020;172:108791.10.1016/j.radphyschem.2020.108791Search in Google Scholar

[34] Sayyed MI, Kaky KM, Şakar E, Akbaba U, Taki MM, Agar O. Gamma radiation shielding investigations for selected germinate glasses. J Non-Cryst Sol. 2019;512:33–40.10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.02.014Search in Google Scholar

[35] Al-Hadeethi Y, Sayyed MI. Radiation attenuation properties of Bi2O3–Na2O– V2O5– TiO2–TeO2 glass system using Phy-X/PSD software. Cer Int. 2020;46:4795.10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.10.212Search in Google Scholar

[36] Akyildirim H, Kavaz E, El-Agawany FI, Yousef E, Rammah YS. Radiation shielding features of zirconolite silicate glasses using XCOM and FLUKA simulation code. J Non-Cryst Sol. 2020;545:120245.10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2020.120245Search in Google Scholar

[37] Kumari H, Patel K, Dhiman SK, Mahajan SK, Ansari GF. Studies of structural and optical properties of tungsten tellurite glasses. Mat Tod Proc. 2022;59(1):1127–31. 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.03.027.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Makishima A, Mackenzie JD. Calculation of bulk modulus, shear modulus and Poisson’s ratio of glass. J Non-Cryst Sol. 1975;17:147–57.10.1016/0022-3093(75)90047-2Search in Google Scholar

[39] Makishima A, Mackenzie JD. Direct calculations of young modulus of glass. J Non-Cryst Sol. 1973;12:35–45.10.1016/0022-3093(73)90053-7Search in Google Scholar

[40] Inaba S, Oda S, Morinaga K. Heat capacity of oxide glasses at high temperature region. J Non-Cryst Sol. 2003;325:258–66.10.1016/S0022-3093(03)00315-6Search in Google Scholar

[41] Palik ED. Handbook of Optical Constants of Solids. Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States: Academic Press; 1985. 10.1016/C2009-0-20920-02.Search in Google Scholar

[42] Hecht E. Optics. 5th edn. England, UK: Pearson; 2021.Search in Google Scholar

[43] Fowles GR. Introduction to Modern Optics. 2nd Edn. New York: Dover Publications Inc; 1990.Search in Google Scholar

[44] Şakar E, Özpolat ÖF, Alım B, Sayyed MI, Kurudirek M. Phy-X/PSD: Development of a user friendly online software for calculation of parameters relevant to radiation shielding and dosimetry. Rad Phys Chem. 2020;166:108496.10.1016/j.radphyschem.2019.108496Search in Google Scholar

[45] ANSI/ANS-6.4.3. Gamma ray attenuation coefficient and buildup factors for engineering materials. La Grane Park, IL: Am Nucl Soc; 1991.Search in Google Scholar

[46] Berger MJ, Hubbell JH. XCOM: photon cross sections database. Web Version 1.2. Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA: Nat Inst Stand Tech; 1987.10.2172/6016002Search in Google Scholar

[47] Jackson DF, Hawkes DJ. X-ray attenuation coefficients of elements and mixtures. Phys Rep. 1981;70:169–233.10.1016/0370-1573(81)90014-4Search in Google Scholar

[48] Almuqrin AH, Albarzan B, Olarinoye I, Kumar A, Alwadai N, Sayyed MI. Mechanical and gamma ray absorption behavior of PbO-WO3-Na2O-MgO-B2O3glasses in the low energy range. Mater. 2021;14(13):3466. 10.3390/ma14133466.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[49] Aloraini DA, Sayyed MI, Kumar A, Kurtulus R, Almuqrin AH, Kavas T. Synthesis, structural investigation, mechanical calculations and photon shielding properties of CaO–K2O–Na2O–P2O5 glass system. Opt Mater. 2021;117:111178.10.1016/j.optmat.2021.111178Search in Google Scholar

[50] Azianty S, Yahya AK. Enhancement of elastic properties by WO3 partial replacement of TeO2 in ternary (80 − x) TeO2–20PbO–xWO3 glass system. J Non-Cryst Sol. 2013;378:234–40.10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2013.07.016Search in Google Scholar

[51] Stalin S, Gaikwad DK, Al-Buriahi MS, Srinivasu C, Ahmed SA, Tekin HO, et al. Influence of Bi2O3/WO3 substitution on the optical, mechanical, chemical durability and gamma ray shielding properties of lithium-borate glasses. Cer Inter. 2021;47:5286–99.10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.10.109Search in Google Scholar

[52] Sayyed MI, Kumar A, El-bashir BO, Mahmoud KA, Zaid MHM, Sidek HAA, et al. Investigation of the mechanical and radiation shielding features for BaO-WO3-P2O5 glass systems. Opt. 2022;258:168810.10.1016/j.ijleo.2022.168810Search in Google Scholar

[53] Sayyed MI. Bismuth modified shielding properties of zinc-tellurite glasses. J All Comp. 2016;688:111–7.10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.07.153Search in Google Scholar

[54] Yasmin S, Barua BS, Khandaker MU, Rashid MA, Bradley DA, Olatunji MA, et al. Studies of ionizing radiation shielding effectiveness of silica-based commercial glasses used in Bangladeshi dwellings. Res Phys. 2018;9:541–9.10.1016/j.rinp.2018.02.075Search in Google Scholar

[55] Mhareb MHA. Physical, optical and shielding features of Li2O–B2O3–MgO–Er2O3 glasses co‑doped of Sm2O3. App Phys A. 2020;126:71.10.1007/s00339-019-3262-9Search in Google Scholar

[56] Ersundu AE, Büyükyıldız M, Ersundu MC, Şakar E, Kurudirek M. The heavy metal oxide glasses within the WO3-MoO3-TeO2 system to investigate the shielding properties of radiation applications. Prog Nucl Energ. 2018;4:280–7.10.1016/j.pnucene.2017.10.008Search in Google Scholar

[57] Al-Hadeethi Y, Sayyed MI. BaO–Li2O–B2O3 glass systems: Potential utilization in gamma radiation protection. Prog Nucl Energ. 2020;129:103511.10.1016/j.pnucene.2020.103511Search in Google Scholar

[58] Al-Hadeethi Y, Sayyed MI. Evaluation of gamma ray shielding characteristics of CaF2–BaO –P2O5 glass system using Phy-X/PSD computer program. Prog Nucl Energ. 2020;126:103397.10.1016/j.pnucene.2020.103397Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-03-27
Revised: 2023-08-29
Accepted: 2023-09-24
Published Online: 2023-10-26

© 2023 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloaded on 24.2.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/chem-2023-0136/html
Scroll to top button