| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1823069 | Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment | 2013 | 6 Pages |
The accuracy of the thermoluminescence (TL) kinetics parameters obtained using the computerized glow curve deconvolution (CGCD) algorithm was tested. The differential equation governing the electron traffic in the one trap–one recombination (OTOR) level model was solved with almost no approximation using the Fehlberg–Runge–Kutta method. A set of simulated glow peaks was generated for a wide range of kinetics parameter values. These glow peaks were then fitted using the general-order kinetics equation. Comparisons between the kinetics parameter values of the simulated glow peaks and those obtained by the CGCD method were made. The results show that the accuracy of the different kinetics parameters obtained by the CGCD method is not the same and that it varies according to the value of the kinetics order (b). The overlapping of two glow peaks with very close maximum peak positions (Tms) results in a glow peak with unexpected values for the kinetics parameters. A set of different cases of overlapping glow peaks is also discussed.
► The differential equation governing the electrons traffic in OTOR model was solved. ► A set of simulated peaks was generated for a range of kinetics parameters values. ► The accuracy of the CGCD algorithm was tested in each case. ► A variation in the accuracy of the CGCD kinetics parameters values was observed. ► Unexpected kinetics parameters were observed in the case of overlapping glow peaks.
