| Literature DB >> 29386564 |
Rang Li1, Ningning Dong2, Feng Ren3, Hiro Amekura4, Jun Wang2, Feng Chen5.
Abstract
We report on the embedded silver (Ag) nanoparticles fabricated by Ag+ ion implantation into the Bi4Ge3O12 (BGO) crystal. Localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) phenomenon has been observed by linear optical absorption spectrum, which is accordance with the expectation based on Mie theory calculation. Further proofs are given by SRIM, TEM and SAED analysis, which explain the slight difference between experiment and calculation. Based on the z-scan system, it is found that the nonlinear optical response is converted from two-photon absorption to three-photon absorption under the 515 nm femtosecond pulse excitation within the LSPR band. The nonlinear absorption coefficient is measured to be ~3.1 × 10-9 cm/W (two-photon absorption coefficient) and ~8.9 × 10-14cm3/W2 (three-photon absorption coefficient) for pure BGO crystal and the sample embedded with Ag nanoparticles (Ag:BGO), respectively. Finally, we have proposed a model to explain the asymmetric nonlinear transmittance, which is in good agreement with the experimental results.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29386564 PMCID: PMC5792466 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-20446-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Z-scan schematic diagram and SRIM simulation. (a) Schematic of z-scan measurement of Ag+ implanted BGO crystal. (b) The Ag+ ions distribution (in red); the displacement per atom distribution(in green).
Figure 2Linear absorption properties of the implanted samples. (a) Calculated absorption of Ag nanoparticles by Mie theory and (b) experimental absorption spectrum of the Ag:BGO sample.
Figure 3TEM and SAED analysis. (a) Superficial overview bright-field TEM micrograph of the Ag:BGO sample. (b) Statistical analysis of the TEM image. (c) SAED analysis of the Ag:BGO sample.
Figure 4The judgment of the orders of the nonlinearity. Plots of ln(1-T(z)) vs ln(I(z)) of BGO when (a) z < 0 and (b) z > 0; Plots of ln(1-T(z)) vs ln(I(z)) of Ag implanted BGO when (c) z < 0 and (d) z > 0.
The value of ln(1-T(z))/ ln(I(z)) for BGO and Ag:BGO under different excitation energy.
| Excitation Energy | BGO | Ag:BGO | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 nJ | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 1.4 |
| 100 nJ | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 1.8 |
| 150 nJ | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 1.8 |
| 200 nJ | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| 250 nJ | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 2.0 |
Figure 5Time evolution of the normalized transmission change for BGO and Ag:BGO with an excitation of 515 nm and 340 fs pulses. The pink line and blue line represent the pump-probe results for Ag:BGO and BGO, respectively.
Figure 6The nonlinear optical response property of BGO and Ag:BGO. Fitting lines to the normalized transmittance as a function of z at 250 nJ for (a) BGO crystal and (b) Ag:BGO sample respectively. The inserts depict the excitation energy dependence.