Aging effect of the precursor solution on the structural, morphological and opto-electrical properties of spray deposited CdO thin films

Open access

Abstract

Nanostructured CdO thin films have been prepared on glass substrates by spray pyrolysis technique using perfume atomizer from fresh and aged (1, 2, 3 and 4 days) precursor solutions. XRD studies confirm that all the films exhibit cubic crystal structure with a (1 1 1) preferential orientation. The preferential orientation factor f(1 1 1) increases with an increase in aging the period of precursor solution. The 2θ value of the (1 1 1) plane shifts towards lower Bragg angles with aging inferring an expansion in the lattice volume of the aged films. Increased crystallite size is observed for the 3-days aged film for which minimum strain and dislocation density values are obtained. Optical transparency increases with an increase in aging period of the precursor solution and the optical band gap exhibits a red shift from 2.48 eV to 2.32 eV. Minimum resistivity of 0.78 × 10−2 Ω·cm is observed for the CdO film prepared from 3-days aged solution. The obtained results infer that the CdO film prepared from 3-days aged solution exhibits better physical properties than the others.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] Gulino A. Castelli F. Dapporto P. Rossi P. Fragala I. Chem. Mater. 14 (2002) 704.

  • [2] Moholkar A.V. Agawane G.L. Sim K.U. Kwon Y. Choi D.S. Rajpure K.Y. Kim J.H. J. Alloy. Compd. 506 (2010) 794.

  • [3] Shanmugavel G. Balu A.R. Ngarethinam V.S. Int. J. Chem. Mater. Res. 2 (2014) 88.

  • [4] Farag A.A.M. Cavan M. Yakuphanoglu F. Mater. Chem. Phys. 132 (2012) 550.

  • [5] Ueda N. Maeda H. Hosono H. Kawazoe H. J. Appl. Phy. 84 (1998) 6174.

  • [6] Yan M. Lane M. Kannewurf C.R. Chang R.P.H. Appl. Phys. Lett. 78 (2001) 2342.

  • [7] Usharani K. Balu A.R. Shanmugavel G. Suganya M. Nagarethinam V.S. Int. J. Sci. Res. Rev. 2 (2013) 53.

  • [8] Maity R. Chattopadhyay K.K. Sol. Energ. Mat. Sol. C. 90 (2006) 597.

  • [9] Balu A.R. Nagarethinam V.S. Suganya M. Arunkumar N. Selvan G. J. Electron. Device. 12 (2012) 739.

  • [10] Usharani K. Raja N. Manjula N. Nagarethinam V.S. Balu A.R. Int. J. Thin Film Sci. Technol. 2 (2015) 89.

  • [11] Manjula N. Balu A.R. Int. J. Chem. Phys. Sci. 3 (2014) 54.

  • [12] Li Y. Xu L. Li X. Shen X. Wang A. Appl. Surf. Sci. 256 (2014) 4541.

  • [13] Selvan G. Abubacker M.P. Usharani K. Balu A.R. Surf. Eng. 32 (2015) 212.

  • [14] Usharani K. Balu A.R. Acta Metall. Sinica 28 (2014) 68.

  • [15] Suganya M. Balu A.R. Usharani K. Mater. Sci.-Poland 32 (2014) 448.

  • [16] Syed Basher Ahamed M.G. Nagarethinam V.S. Balu A.R. Thayumanavan A. Murali K.R. Sanjeeviraja C. Jayachandran M. Cryst. Res. Technol. 45 (2010) 421.

  • [17] Ravishankar S. Balu A.R. Anbarasi M. Nagarethinam V.S. Optik 126 (2015) 2550.

  • [18] Rajashree C. Balu A.R. Nagarethinam V.S. Surf. Eng. 31 (2015) 316.

  • [19] Usharani K. Balu A.R. Nagarethinam V.S. Surf. Eng. 32 (2016) 829.

  • [20] Lejimi N. Savadoga O. Solar. Energ. Mat. Sol. C. 70 (2001) 71.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.918
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.916

CiteScore 2018: 1.01

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.275
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.561

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 459 459 22
PDF Downloads 388 388 14