• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.1-7
• /
• 2017

Cobalt silicide was used as a counter electrode in order to confirm its reliability in dye-sensitized solar cell (DSSC) devices. 100 nm-Co/300 nm-Si/quartz was formed by an evaporator and cobalt silicide was formed by vacuum heat treatment at $700^{\circ}C$ for 60 min to form approximately 350 nm-CoSi. This process was followed by etching in $80^{\circ}C$-30% $H_2SO_4$ to remove the cobalt residue on the cobalt silicide surface. Also, for the comparison against Pt, we prepared a 100 nm-Pt/glass counter electrode. Cobalt silicide was used for the counter electrode in order to confirm its reliability in DSSC devices and maintained for 0, 168, 336, 504, 672, and 840 hours at $80^{\circ}C$. The photovoltaic properties of the DSSCs employing cobalt silicide were confirmed by using a simulator and potentiostat. Cyclic-voltammetry, field emission scanning electron microscopy, focused ion beam scanning electron microscopy, and energy dispersive spectrometry analyses were used to confirm the catalytic activity, microstructure, and composition, respectively. The energy conversion efficiency (ECE) as a function of time and ECE of the DSSC with Pt and CoSi counter electrodes were maintained for 504 hours. However, after 672 hours, the ECEs decreased to a half of their initial values. The results of the catalytic activity analysis showed that the catalytic activities of the Pt and CoSi counter electrodes decreased to 64% and 57% of their initial values, respectively(after 840 hours). The microstructure analysis showed that the CoSi layer improved the durability in the electrolyte, but because the stress concentrates on the contact surface between the lower quartz substrate and the CoSi layer, cracks are formed locally and flaking occurs. Thus, deterioration occurs due to the residual stress built up during the silicidation of the CoSi counter electrode, so it is necessary to take measures against these residual stresses, in order to ensure the reliability of the electrode.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.57-65
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The purpose is to clarify the effect of additional scattering ratio on the edge of the block according to the increasing block thickness with low melting point lead alloy and pure lead in electron beam therapy. Methods and materials: $10{\times}10cm^2$ Shielding blocks made of low melting point lead alloy and pure lead were fabricated to shield mold frame half of applicator. Block thickness was 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 (mm) for each material. The common irradiation conditions were set at 6 MeV energy, 300 MU / Min dose rate, gantry angle of $0^{\circ}$, and dose of 100 MU. The relative scattering ratio with increasing block thickness was measured with a parallel plate type ion chamber(Exradin P11) and phantom(RW3) by varying the position of the shielding block(cone and on the phantom), the position of the measuring point(surface ans depth of $D_{max}$), and the block material(lead alloy and pure lead). Results : When (depth of measurement / block position / block material) was (surface / applicator / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.33 nC(+0.33 %), 15.28 nC(0 %), 15.08 nC(-1.31 %), 15.05 nC(-1.51 %), 15.07 nC(-1.37 %) as the block thickness increased in order of 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 (mm) respectively. When it was (surface / applicator / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.19 nC(-0.59 %), 15.25 nC(-0.20 %), 15.15 nC(-0.85 %), 14.96 nC(-2.09 %), 15.15 nC(-0.85 %) respectively. When it was (surface / phantom / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.62 nC(+2.23 %), 15.59 nC(+2.03 %), 15.53 nC(+1.67 %), 15.48 nC(+1.31 %), 15.34 nC(+0.39 %) respectively. When it was (surface / phantom / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.56 nC(+1.83 %), 15.55 nC(+1.77 %), 15.51 nC(+1.51 %), 15.42 nC(+0.92 %), 15.39 nC(+0.72 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / applicator / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 16.70 nC(-10.87 %), 16.84 nC(-10.12 %), 16.72 nC(-10.78 %), 16.88 nC(-9.93 %), 16.90 nC(-9.82 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / applicator / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 16.83 nC(-10.19 %), 17.12 nC(-8.64 %), 16.89 nC(-9.87 %), 16.77 nC(-10.51 %), 16.52 nC(-11.85 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / phantom / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 17.41 nC(-7.10 %), 17.45 nC(-6.88 %), 17.34 nC(-7.47 %), 17.42 nC(-7.04 %), 17.25 nC(-7.95 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / phantom / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 17.45 nC(-6.88 %), 17.44 nC(-6.94 %), 17.47 nC(-6.78 %), 17.43 nC(-6.99 %), 17.35 nC(-7.42 %) respectively. Conclusions: When performing electron therapy using a shielding block, the block position should be inserted applicator rather than the patient's body surface. The block thickness should be made to the minimum appropriate shielding thickness of each corresponding using energy. Also it is useful that the treatment should be performed considering the influence of scattering dose varying with distance from the edge of block.