中文核心期刊
CNKI期刊全文数据库
中国科学引文数据库(CSCD)源期刊
中国科技论文统计源期刊
万方数据知识服务平台
英国《科学文摘》(SA)
美国化学文摘(CA)
俄罗斯《文摘杂志》(AJ)
德国《天文学与天体物理学文摘》(AAA)
英国《中国天文学和天体物理学》(SCI收录)全文摘译期刊之一
《中国学术期刊文摘》
《中国物理文摘》
《中国天文学文摘》

Chinese Journal of Space Science ›› 2019, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (1): 62-68.doi: 10.11728/cjss2019.01.062

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison between the Electron Capture Capacity of SF6 and CF3Br

BAI Yun1,2, SHI Hongxing1,2, ZHAO Jing2, WANG Geng2, CHEN Yankun2   

  1. 1 Protection of National State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Metaplasia, Beijing 102205;
    2 Institute of Chemical Defense, Beijing 102205
  • Received:2017-11-28 Revised:2018-04-18 Online:2019-01-15 Published:2019-01-30

Abstract:

The sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) and trifluoromethane (CF3Br) are two kinds of ionospheric modification agents. The GC-ECD and DFT evaluation method for vacuum electron absorption are designed, and two methods are used to evaluate the SF6 and CF3Br. Finally, the results of two methods are compared and analyzed. The results of GC-ECD evaluation method show that SF6 and CF3Br have better response on ECD detector, and the response of CF3Br on ECD detector is stronger than that of SF6. The results of DFT evaluation method show that both SF6 and CF3Br have superior electron absorption capacity. Considering the results of the GC-ECD and DFT evaluation method, it can be seen that both SF6 and CF3Br have obvious electron absorption capacity and have superior electron absorption effect. The electron absorption effect of CF3Br is superior to that of SF6.

Key words: electron capture capacity, GC-ECD, DFT, SF6, CF3Br

CLC Number: