<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">MSCE</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Materials Science and Chemical Engineering</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2327-6045</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/msce.2024.122004</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">MSCE-131271</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Chemistry&amp;Materials Science</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Evaluation of Particle Properties of MgO/TiO&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt; Material by Monte Carlo Simulation Method
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Koffi</surname><given-names>N’guessan Placide Gabin Allangba</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Yves</surname><given-names>Kily Hervé Fagnidi</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hermann</surname><given-names>N’guessan</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Zié</surname><given-names>Traoré</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Koffi</surname><given-names>Arnaud Kamenan</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5"><sup>5</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Science and Technology, University Alassane Ouattara, Bouaké, C&amp;amp;#244;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Physics Pedagogical Unit, Laboratory of Environmental Science and Technology, University Jean Lorougnon Guédé, Daloa, 
C&amp;amp;#244;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff5"><addr-line>Department of Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry, UFR Biological Sciences, University Peleforo Gon Coulibaly, Korhogo, C&amp;amp;#244;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Laboratory of Fundamental and Applied Physics, University Nangui Abrogoua, Abidjan, C&amp;amp;#244;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff4"><addr-line>Department of Medical Physics, University of Trieste and International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), Trieste, Italy</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>20</day><month>02</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>49</fpage><lpage>60</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>9,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2024</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>19,</day>	<month>February</month>	<year>2024</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>22,</day>	<month>February</month>	<year>2024</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  The simulation by the Monte Carlo method executed by the software PyPENELOPE proved effective to specify the particle propagation characteristics by calculating the absorption fractions, backscattering and transmission of electrons and secondary photons under the incidence of 0.5 to 20 KeV range of primary electrons. More than 99.9% of the primary electrons were transmitted in the 125 nm thick MgO/TiO
  <sub>2</sub> material at 20 KeV. This occurred because several interactions took place in the transmitted primary irradiation such as characteristic, fluorescence, and bremsstrahlung produced when of the occupation of the KL3, KL2, KM3, and KM2 shell and sub-shell of titanium and magnesium which are the elements with a high atomic number in the material. The transmission particle characteristic of this material is therefore an indicator capable of improving the electrical performance and properties of the sensor.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Monte Carlo</kwd><kwd> PyPENELOPE</kwd><kwd> Primary Electrons Transmission</kwd><kwd> MgO/TiO&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt;</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Because of the great technological interest of applications in nanoscience, many research works both by experimentation and simulation have been conducted to elucidate the mechanism of understanding the trajectory of electrons and photons revealing the electronic and optical properties of certains nanomaterials doped thin oxide such as titanium oxide (TiO<sub>2</sub>) and magnesium monoxide (MgO). TiO<sub>2</sub> is one of the most widely used nanomaterials in a wide range of applications, including as a white pigment for the pharmaceutical and food industry, skin sunscreen, photo-catalysts [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref2">2</xref>] , water treatment, hydrogen production, ethylene recovery and antimicrobial activity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref4">4</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref6">6</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref7">7</xref>] . One of the major problems with TiO<sub>2</sub> is that the extent of electron hole recombination is higher than that of some other promising materials [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref8">8</xref>] . In an attempt to overcome this problem, researchers are implementing many ways to improve the solar conversion efficiency of TiO<sub>2</sub> while using doping studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref9">9</xref>] . Metal oxides are recognized as the best TiO<sub>2</sub> dopants. The most common that has been synthesized into a range of nanostructure morphologies is MgO. It is known as an inert material with a high melting point, as a typical wide band-gap insulator. And its substrate has been widely used for high-Tc superconductor (HTSC) thin-film coating applications worldwide. When it is used as a substrate for nanoparticle catalysts, the main physical properties need to be better understood for the transition from solid state to molecule scale [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref10">10</xref>] . Impressive results in medical biotechnology indicated that the TiO<sub>2</sub> nano-thin film coating stimulated the adhesion and proliferation of coronary arterial endothelial cells with additional characteristics acting as a protective barrier [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref11">11</xref>] . The data revealed that surface morphology and surface hydrophilia contributed to the success of the atomic layer deposition nanoscale coating, which also acted as a protective layer inhibiting the release of harmful degradation products from the magnesium-zinc stent [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref11">11</xref>] . Based on the studies of Luis Anaya et al., mixed oxide nanoparticles (MONs, TiO<sub>2</sub>-ZnO-MgO) obtained by the sol-gel method were characterized by transmission electron microscopy and thermogravimetric analysis. In addition, the effect of MON on the microbial growth of Escherichia coli, Salmonella paratyphi, Staphylococcus aureus, and Listeria monocytogenes, as well as the toxicity against Artemia salina by the lethal concentration test was evaluated [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref12">12</xref>] . Several research teams have also printed thin films to study the experimental physical properties of materials [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref13">13</xref>] . This study can be carried out thanks to the Monte Carlo (MC) simulation method which is used because of its high accuracy such as Gamma ray transport [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref14">14</xref>] . MC was used to reduce the complexity of mathematical expressions in which Fourier random characteristics are applied to approach the Exponentiated Quadratic kernel [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref15">15</xref>] . It is possible to simulate certains phenomena such as the cascade of particles in materials of Novel lead oxide-based flexible dosimeters for electron therapy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref16">16</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref17">17</xref>] . Monte Carlo simulation is a crucial tool for specifying the possible density of dispersed particles, the generation of secondary radiation, and the transmission ratio of primary particles from the material structure. Various simulation software, including Geant4, MCNPX, and PyPENELOPE, were composed to simulate the interactions between the particles and the designed structure. Most of these simulation programs depend on multiple scattering theories for electron transport to reduce computation time [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref18">18</xref>] . PENELOPE means Penetration and energy loss of positrons and electrons in matter. It uses the Monte Carlo method for the simulation of numerous apparatuses as dosimeter and material structure. It will therefore be a tool of choice to simulate MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub>. PENELOPE combines numerical and analytical total and differential cross sections (DCS) to describe the different interaction mechanisms. These cross-sections are the result of approximate physical models and, therefore, are affected by systematic uncertainties. The interaction mechanisms considered in PENELOPE, and the corresponding DCSs, are as follows: Elastic diffusion of electrons and positrons where these cross sections were calculated using the program ELSEPA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref19">19</xref>] , Inelastic collisions of electrons and positrons [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref20">20</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref21">21</xref>] , Electron impact ionization [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref22">22</xref>] , Bremsstrahlung emission by electrons and positrons [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref23">23</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref25">25</xref>] , Positron annihilation, Coherent dispersion (Rayleigh) of photons, Incoherent dispersion (Compton) of photons [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref26">26</xref>] , Photoelectric absorption of photons [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref27">27</xref>] , Production of electron-positron pairs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref28">28</xref>] . Buse et al. conducted a study on the structural, morphological and optical properties and performance of gas sensors of titanium dioxide (TiO<sub>2</sub>) doped thin films with magnesium oxide (MgO). The material was therefore manufactured in different thicknesses namely 125 nm, 140 nm and 190 nm. The best results obtained with the material of thickness 125 nm. They showed that the dopant is able to improve the electrical performance and properties of the sensor [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref29">29</xref>] . In our work, we will attempt to provide additional information on particle properties in order to explain the microscopic electron propagation in MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub>.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><p>This work was performed with Monte Carlo simulation code using the PyPENELOPE software which is a version of PENELOPE executed by the Python program as was the case in several works [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref30">30</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref31">31</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref32">32</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref33">33</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref34">34</xref>] . It is one of the best tools to evaluate the transport of the particle in the material describing the different types of interaction. The material MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> studied by Buse et al. which presented certain physical properties but without giving the characteristics of particle propagation related to the absorption, backscattering and transmission properties of electrons and photons in matter. In this work, we simulated a primary electron incident beam and sent perpendicularly on the MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> material in the optimal conditions in order to study the propagation effects. Our beam source was at the initial coordinate position (0; 0; 0) under a polar angle range of zero to 180˚. The number of electrons was a range from 7.5 &#215; 10<sup>6</sup> to 26.3 &#215; 10<sup>6</sup>. The diameter of the beam was set to 10 &#181;m. Multilayer geometry was used for the material consisting of MgO density 3.35 g/cm<sup>3</sup> and TiO<sub>2</sub> density 4.23 g/cm<sup>3</sup>. The default interaction forcing was configured and used during the simulation. These simulations were performed for different values of incident irradiation of range 0.5 KeV to 20 KeV. The work of Buse et al. showed the 125 nm thickness material is promising for the sensor fabricator [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref29">29</xref>] . It will therefore be the subject of our study. Each molecule composing the material was half the total thickness i.e., 62.5 nm for MgO and 62.5 nm for TiO<sub>2</sub>. A laptop computer performed the simulation with i5 2.4 GHz CPU and 8 GB RAM under Windows operating systems. The PyPENELOPE software simulation parameters were defined as in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref35">35</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results and Discussion</title><p>Many research teams studied the MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> material to understand its geometrical structure, electronic structure, and other general interfacial properties, which are not yet clear from a microscopic perspective. In this work, the MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> thickness proposed by Buse et al. was 125 nm. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref> below presents the results of simulations relating to the fraction of particles absorbed, backscattered or transmitted in the material according to the different beam energies.</p><p>The fractions of absorbed, backscattered and transmitted radiation within MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> structure were obtained after simulating a number of electrons ranging from 7.5 &#215; 10<sup>6</sup> to 26.3 &#215; 10<sup>6</sup> and their distributions were estimated via the pyPENELOPE Monte Carlo code. Our study is focused on the propagation effect of a range of 0.1 KeV to 20 KeV of incident primary irradiation on 125 nm as thickness of MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> materials. Absorbed fraction for primary irradiation spread on a range of 1.484 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup> to 0.8133 on all the energy. It decreases to the smallest value except for secondary electron which increases to a peak at 5 KeV before decreasing to 10 KeV (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(a)). Regarding backscattered fraction, Primary irradiation fraction is high for small incident beam energy. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(b) show the plots decrease when the energy increase. Regarding the transmitted fraction, almost all incident primary beam was transmitted when the energies increase. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(c) shows from 0.5 to 10 KeV a growing right and after 10 KeV up to 20 KeV, a plateau whose constituent points vary very little keeping a transmission fraction ranging from 93 to 99.9% within material. Uncertainty is low for all calculation (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>). The transmission fraction is acceptable because its agreement with Senol’s works [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref16">16</xref>] . The highest energy gives therefore a better transmitted fraction.</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Simulation parameters</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Material</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Absorption energy of electrons (eV)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Absorption energy of photons (eV)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Absorption energy of positrons (eV)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Elastic scattering parameter C1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Elastic scattering parameter C2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Cutoff energy loss of inelastic collision-WCC (eV)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Cutoff energy loss of Bremsstrahlung collision-WCR (eV)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MgO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TiO<sub>2</sub></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Absorbed, backscattered and transmitted fraction of the simulated primary and secondary irradiations</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Primary irradiation</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Secondary electron</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Secondary photon</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fraction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Uncertainty &#215;10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fraction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Uncertainty &#215;10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fraction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Uncertainty &#215;10<sup>−5</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.5 KeV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Absorbed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.8133</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77.28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.956 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.872 &#215; 10<sup>−4</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Backscattered</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.2061</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.02</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.01945</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.381 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.571 &#215; 10<sup>−4</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Transmitted</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.613 &#215; 10<sup>−9</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.639 &#215; 10<sup>−6</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.613 &#215; 10<sup>−9</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.639 &#215; 10<sup>−6</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.455 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.201 &#215; 10<sup>−4</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 KeV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Absorbed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.8337</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39.63</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.633</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >150.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.017 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.729 &#215; 10<sup>−2</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Backscattered</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.1864</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.81</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.02011</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.21 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.032 &#215; 10<sup>−2</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Transmitted</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.335 &#215; 10<sup>−8</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.881 &#215; 10<sup>−8</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.335 &#215; 10<sup>−8</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.881 &#215; 10<sup>−3</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.092 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.265 &#215; 10<sup>−2</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 KeV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Absorbed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.4713</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >79.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1038</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0007582</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >91.55</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Backscattered</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.1642</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75.28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.01341</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000582</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Transmitted</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.393</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.01503</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0005472</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >91.01</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 KeV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Absorbed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0101</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.382</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.573</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >438.8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0003839</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >49.35</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Backscattered</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.08545</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.95</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.008214</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.564</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0003717</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >62.78</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Transmitted</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.9332</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.02055</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.01</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0003786</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >52.46</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >15 KeV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Absorbed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0002819</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.581</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >182.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0002335</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.36</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Backscattered</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.03223</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.79</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005595</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.376</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0002493</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43.27</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Transmitted</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.9879</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.58</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.01486</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.116</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0002623</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.53</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >20 KeV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Absorbed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.484 &#215; 10<sup>−5</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.809</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >257.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0001696</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61.04</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Backscattered</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.01648</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004446</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0001922</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >80.83</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Transmitted</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.9996</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.01161</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.76</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0002046</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67.23</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The probability density of backscattered and transmitted particles distributed according to the energy in the material of 125 nm, is illustrated in the following <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>.</p><p>For incident primary irradiation of 20 KeV, the energy distribution of the backscattered electrons extends over a range from zero to 20 KeV. A peak of the probability density just after 0 KeV is observed and decreases immediately before increasing again for another peak around 18 KeV. After this peak, the probability again reaches another peak at 20 KeV. This shows that the primary electrons propagate in cascade by penetrating in the structure of the material thus creating interactions with the electrons present on the transitions of the</p><p>atomic elements constituting the material. Thus, a low probability density of electrons and photons is evidenced. The backscattered photons weakly emit two signals in peak before 1 KeV, a peak at about 1.2 KeV and a peak between 4 and 5 KeV (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). A similar phenomenon is also observed for transmitted photons (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>). Concerning transmitted electrons, a density of probability almost zero during the simulation and begins to increase from 17 KeV and reaches a peak around 19 KeV (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>).</p><p>The polar angle changes from 0 to 180˚ during the simulation. The probability density started to increase to 120˚ for emerging electrons and reach a peak at 180˚. Emerging photon probability density is stable during simulation from 0 to 180˚ but drop only in 90˚ (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>).</p><p>The peaks observed then of emission and backscattering of the particles also appear on <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>(a) of the photon spectrum.The curve described by the photon spectrum is Bremsstrahlung phenomenon. It occurred on all energy range (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>).</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref> showed that the characteristic energy of titanium (Z = 22) electron transitions is between 4 and 5 KeV. These lines are very different, we can quote KL3, KL2, KM3 and KM2 sub-shell occupied under certain incident energy like 10 and 20 KeV. Typically, Kβ line of Ti is 4.931 KeV [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref36">36</xref>] . Kα line of Mg (1.253 KeV) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref37">37</xref>] is higher than 1 KeV, it is therefore not shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>(c). The particle occupation of these titanium and magnesium shell and sub-shell are responsible for the better transmission fraction rate of primary electrons in the material and cause the phenomena such as the emission of characteristics,</p><p>fluorescence X-rays and bremsstrahlung. At low incidence energy (1 KeV), the particle occupancy of these shell and sub-shell is low and non-existent in magnesium (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>(c)). Indeed, these high-energy electrons must release energy to fill the lower energy gaps in the atom. These generated photons can be classified as radiation contamination for sensor application. Therefore, potential radiation contamination consists of generated X-rays, including the continuum (Bremsstrahlung), X-ray characteristics and fluorescence [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131271-ref38">38</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Conclusion</title><p>At the end of this study, it was demonstrated the good quality of the Monte Carlo simulation method by the PyPENELOPE software which was revealed to be a tool of choice in the calculation of the absorption, backscatter and transmission fraction of particles through the material. Under an incident energy of 20 KeV of primary electrons, more than 99.9% of these particles were transmitted in the material MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> thanks to several radiation interaction matter which governs this particle propagation namely the characteristic line, fluorescence and bremsstrahlung. These interactions were produced on KL3, KL2, KM3, and KM2 shell and sub-shell of Mg and Ti. These properties may therefore improve the performance of this material in the manufacture of future sensors.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Acknowledgement</title><p>The study was performed by Medical Physics research unit in C&#244;te d’Ivoire, ICTP, Trieste University in Italy. The authors acknowledge with gratitude the support from the unit.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Allangba, K.N.P.G., Fagnidi, Y.K.H., N’guessan, H., Traor&#233;, Z. and Kamenan, K.A. (2024) Evaluation of Particle Properties of MgO/TiO<sub>2</sub> Material by Monte Carlo Simulation Method. Journal of Materials Science and Chemical Engineering, 12, 49-60. https://doi.org/10.4236/msce.2024.122004</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.131271-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hoffmann, M.R., Martin, S.T., Choi, W. and Bahnemann, D.W. (1995) Environmental Applications of Semiconductor Photocatalysis. Chemical Reviews, 95, 69-96. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr00033a004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Linsebigler, A.L., Lu, G.Q. and Yates Jr., J.T. (1997) Photocatalysis on TiO2 Surfaces: Principles, Mechanisms, and Selected Results. Chemical Reviews, 95, 735-738. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr00035a013</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Venkatasubramanian, R., Srivastava, R.S. and Misra, R.D.K. (2008) Comparative Study of Antimicrobial and Photocatalytic Activity in Titania Encapsulated Composite Nanoparticles with Different Dopants. Materials Science and Technology, 24, 589-595. https://doi.org/10.1179/174328408X282065</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Robichaud, C.O., Uyar, A.E., Darby, M.R., Zucker, L.G. and Wiesner, M.R. (2009) Estimates of Upper Bounds and Trends in Nano-TiO2 Production as a Basis for Exposure Assessment. Environmental Science &amp; Technology, 43, 4227-4233. https://doi.org/10.1021/es8032549</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pérez-Larios, A., Hernandez-Gordillo, A., Morales-Mendoza, G., Lartundo-Rojas, L., Mantilla, A. and Gómez, R. (2016) Enhancing the H2 Evolution from Water-Methanol Solution Using Mn2+-Mn+3-Mn4+Redox Species of Mn-Doped TiO2 Sol-Gel. Catalysis Today, 266, 9-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2015.12.029</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Anaya-Esparza, L.M., Ruvalcaba-Gómez, J.M., Romero-Toledo, R., Sánchez-Burgos, J.A., Montalvo-González, E. and Pérez-Larios, A. (2021) Investigating Structural Changes of Chitosan-TiO2 and Chitosan-TiO2-ZnO-MgO Hybrid Films during Storage by FTIR Spectroscopy. Macedonian Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, 40,197-211. https://doi.org/10.20450/mjcce.2021.2396</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Roychaudhury, A.M., Utsa, D., Sujay, M., Goutam, K.B., Abhigyan D., Masanta, S., Achintya S., Aritra B., Debtanu G., Partha, C. and Apurba, K.D. (2022) Synthesis Structural and Anti-Microbial Characterization of Nanostructured Doped Tin Oxide. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Physics, 16, Article ID: 162202.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fujishima, A. and Honda, K. (1972) Electrochemical Photolysis of Water at a Semiconductor Electrode. Nature, 238, 37-38. https://doi.org/10.1038/238037a0</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Li, X., Huang, H., Bin, H., Peng, Z., Zhu, C., Xue, L., Zhang, Z.G., Zhang, Z., Ade, H. and Li, Y. (2017) Synthesis and Photovoltaic Properties of a Series of Narrow Bandgap Organic Semiconductor Acceptors with Their Absorption Edge Reaching 900 nm. Chemistry of Materials, 29, 10130-10138. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b03928</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Liang, C., Can, X., Zhang, X.F. and Tao, Z. (2009) Raman and Infrared-Active Modes in MgO Nanotubes. Physica E: Low-Dimensional Systems and Nanostructures, 41, 852-855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physe.2009.01.006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fan, Y., Run. C. and Webster, T.J. (2019) Atomic Layer Deposition Coating of TiO2 Nano-Thin Films on Magnesium-Zinc Alloys to Enhance Cytocompatibility for Bioresorbable Vascular Stents. International Journal of Nanomedicine, 14, 9955-9970. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S199093</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Anaya-Esparza, L.M., González-Silva, N., Yahia, E.M., González-Vargas, O.A., Montalvo-González, E. and Pérez-Larios, A. (2019) Effect of TiO2-ZnO-MgO Mixed Oxide on Microbial Growth and Toxicity against Artemia salina. Nanomaterials, 9, Article 992. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9070992</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jun, S.C., Dong, W.K., Jun, Y.S., Jae, H.N. and Ji, H.C. (2020) Electrical and Chemical Sensing Properties of a Printed Indium-Tin-Oxide Film for the Detection of Hazardous and Noxious Substances. Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 76, 1005-1009. https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.76.1005</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">El-Tayebany, R.A. and Elbegawy, H. (2023) Assessment of Modeling Collimator Designs for γ-Ray Transmission of Uranium Oxide Spectrometry Using HPGe Detectors. World Journal of Engineering and Technology, 11, 663-671. https://doi.org/10.4236/wjet.2023.114044</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Di, Q.L. (2022) Quasi-Monte Carlo Approximations for Exponentiated Quadratic Kernel in Latent Force Models. Open Journal of Modelling and Simulation, 10, 349-390. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojmsi.2022.104021</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Senol, K. (2022) An Investigation on Quantitative Detector Characteristics of Novel Flexible Skin Dosimeter Using Monte Carlo Simulation Method. Journal of New Results in Science, 11, 100-110. https://doi.org/10.54187/jnrs.1103993</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Michael, S., Tara, N., Genevieve, N.H., Bradley, W., Jérémie, W., Bjoern, N., Christophe, B., Volker R., David, P.F. and Mariana, I.B. (2017) Charge Collection in Hybrid Perovskite Solar Cells: Relation to the Nanoscale Elemental Distribution. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics, 7, 590-597. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPHOTOV.2016.2633801</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kahraman, A., Kaya, S., Jaksic, A. and Yilmaz, E. (2015) A Comprehensive Study on the Photon Energy Response of RadFET Dosimeters Using the PENELOPE Monte Carlo Code. Radiation Effects and Defects in Solids, 170, 367-376. https://doi.org/10.1080/10420150.2015.1010167</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Salvat, F., Jablonski, A. and Powell, C. (2005) ELSEPA-Dirac Partial-Wave Calculation of Elastic Scattering of Electrons and Positrons by Atoms, Positive Ions and Molecules. Computer Physics Communications, 165, 157-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2004.09.006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Liljequist, D. (1983) A Simple Calculation of Inelastic Mean Free Path and Stopping Power for 50 eV-50 keV Electrons in Solids. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 16, 1567-1582. https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/16/8/023</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sternheimer, R. (1952) The Density Effect for the Ionization Loss in Various Materials. Physical Review Journals Archive, 88, 851-859. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.88.851</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bote, D. and Salvat, F. (2008) Calculations of Inner-Shell Ionization by Electron Impact with the Distorted-Wave and Plane-Wave Born Approximations. Physical Review A, 77, Article ID: 042701. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.77.042701</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Acosta, E., Llovet, X. and Salvat, F. (2002) Monte Carlo Simulation of Bremsstrahlung Emission by Electrons. Applied Physics Letters, 80, 3228-3330. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1473684</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kissel, L., Quarles, C. and Pratt, R. (1983) Shape Functions for Atomic-Field Bremsstrahlung from Electrons of Kinetic Energy 1-500 keV on Selected Neutral Atoms 1 ≤ Z ≤ 92. Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables, 28, 381-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-640X(83)90001-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brusa, D., Stutz, G., Riveros, J., Fernández-Vera, J. and Salvat, F. (1996) Fast Sampling Algorithm for the Simulation of Photon Compton Scattering. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, 379, 167-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(96)00652-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cullen, D.E., Chen, M.H., Hubbell, J.H., Perkins, S.T., Plechaty, E.F., Rathkopf, J.A. and Scofield, J.H. (1989) Tables and Graphs of Photon-Interaction cross Sections from 10 eV to 100 GeV Derived from the LLNL Evaluated Photon Data Library (EPDL). Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Livermore. https://doi.org/10.2172/6901925</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Berger, M. and Hubbell, J. (1987) Photon cross Sections on a Personal Computer. National Bureau of Standards, Washington DC. https://doi.org/10.2172/6016002</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Perkins, S., Cullen, D., Hubbell, J., Rathkopf, J. and Scofield, J. (1991) Tables and Graphs of Atomic Subshell and Relaxation Data Derived from the LLNL Evaluated Atomic Data Library (EADL), Z=1-100. Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore. https://doi.org/10.2172/10121422</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Buse, C.S., Nihan, A.S., Meltem, D.K. and Suleyman, O. (2019) Development of MgO: TiO2 Thin Films for Gas Sensor Applications. Ceramics International, 45, 2917-2921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.11.079</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Stewart, R.D., Wilson, W.E., McDonald, J.C. and Strom, D.J. (2002) Microdosimetric Properties of Ionizing Electrons in Water: A Test of the PENELOPE Code System. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 47, 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/47/1/306</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Requena, S., Williams, S. and Quarles, C.A. (2010) A Comparison of the Bremsstrahlung Yields from 53 keV Electrons on Gold Targets Produced by PENELOPE and Experiment. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 268, 3561-3568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2010.09.006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gonzales, D., Cavness, B. and Williams, S. (2011) Angular Distribution of Thick-Target Bremsstrahlung Produced by Electrons with Initial Energies Ranging from 10 to 20 keV Incident on Ag. Physical Review A, 84, Article ID: 052726. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.052726</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Statham, P., Llovet, X. and Duncumb, P. (2012) Systematic Discrepancies in Monte Carlo Predictions of k-Ratios Emitted from Thin Films on Substrates. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 32, Article ID: 012024.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Adamson, P., Cannon, C. and Williams, S. (2021) Bremsstrahlung Produced by 5 keV Electrons Incident on BeO and NaCl. Nuclear Instruments &amp; Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 490, 43-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2021.01.006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yi, C.Y., Hah, S.H. and Yeom, M.S. (2006) Monte Carlo Calculation of the Ionisation Chamber Response to Co-60 Beam Using PENELOPE. Medical Physics, 33, 1213-1221. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2188822</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Camus, P. (2009) Thermo Scientific. White Paper 51782.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hyperphysics Concept (2023) Experimental K α X-Rays Energies.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Tables/kxray.html</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131271-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sangeetha, P., Divya, K.N., Sandhya, B. and Subrahmanya, B.B. (2020) Production of X-RAYS Using X-RAY Tube. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1712, Article ID: 012036.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>