Spectroscopic analysis of LiKGdF5:Er3+, Sm3+ single crystal

On standardization of low symmetry crystal fields

“…The examples of four-rank standardization shown in Table 1 indicate that the crystal field for all three RE ions is similar as expected and has predominantly axial character -the largest nonaxial parameter is less than one-third of B 40 in absolute values. These observations are not supported by the RBS values shown in Table 1 and contradict the conclusion of the original paper drawn on the ground of the results not standardized [41].…”

“…[39], may serve as an example of such a situation. In Table 1 we recall the standardized data from that paper obtained for three different rare earth ions, f Sm ( ) 3 5 + , f Tb ( ) 3 8 + , f Er ( ) 3 1 1 + doped into the LiKGdF 5 matrix [40,41]. Varying position of the largest/most important parameter for each set (distinguished in bold typeface in Table 1) and the scattering of the remaining values, if one compares first three columns, gives an impression that the crystal filed effect varies far beyond the expectations across the series.…”

Luminescent spectroscopy of TbF3 and TbF3–SmF3–HoF3–PrF3 crystals

“…Thus, the luminescent relaxation data prove that the transitions observed in TSHPF crystal originate from different excited states (initial levels) of the same luminescent centers or take place in luminescent centers of different kinds. The emission band near 560 nm is usually attributed to the 4 G 5/2 → 6 H 5/2 transition of Sm 3+ [16,17]. In our opinion, for the TSHPF crystals, the emission near 560 nm also belongs to the Sm 3+ ions, and is caused by the transition from the 4 G 7/2 level to five Stark components of the 6 H 9/2 level.…”