4.7 Article

Optimization of deposition conditions of CdS thin films using response surface methodology

Journal

JOURNAL OF ALLOYS AND COMPOUNDS
Volume 589, Issue -, Pages 207-212

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2013.11.067

Keywords

CdS thin films; Chemical bath deposition; Optimization; Response surface methodology; Central composite design

Funding

  1. Scientific Research Commission of Mustafa Kemal University [309]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cadmium sulfide (CdS) thin films were prepared on glass substrates by chemical bath deposition (CBD) technique under different pH, stirring speed and deposition time. Response Surface Methodology (RSM) and Central Composite Design (CCD) were used to optimization of deposition parameters of the CdS thin films. RSM and CCD were also used to understand the significance and interaction of the factors affecting the film quality. Variables were determined as pH, stirring speed and deposition time. The band gap was chosen as response in the study. Influences of the variables on the band gap and the film quality were investigated. 5-level-3-factor central composite design was employed to evaluate the effects of the deposition conditions parameters such as pH (10.2-11.8), stirring speed (132-468 rpm) and deposition time (33-67 min) on the band gap of the films. The samples were characterized using X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscope (SEM) and ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy (UV-vis) measurements. The optimal conditions for the deposition parameters of the CdS thin films have been found to be: pH 11, 361 of stirring speed and 55 min of deposition time. Under the optimal conditions theoretical (predicted) band gap of CdS (2.66 eV) was calculated using optimal coded values from the model and the theoretical value is good agreement with the value (2.72 eV) obtained by verification experiment. (C) 2013 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available