3.8 Article

Synthesis and characterization of monosize magnetic poly(glycidyl methacrylate) beads

Journal

CHINA PARTICUOLOGY
Volume 5, Issue 1-2, Pages 174-179

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpart.2007.01.004

Keywords

polyglycidyl methacrylate; monosize beads; magnetic materials

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Monosize, 1.6 mu m, magnetic beads of poly(glycidyl methacrylate) [M-poly(GMA)], were prepared by dispersion polymerization in the presence of Fe3O4 nano-powder. Monosize M-poly(GMA) beads were characterized by swelling tests, density measurements, electron spin resonance (ESR), vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The characteristic functional groups of M-poly(GMA) beads were analyzed by Fourier transform infrared spectrometer (FTIR). The M-poly(GMA) beads are highly uniform in size and have a spherical shape and non-porous structure. Polydispersity index (PDI) of M-poly(GMA) beads was calculated to be around 1.008. The hydrated density of the M-poly(GMA) beads measured at 25 degrees C was 1.14 g/cm(3). The content of oxirane groups on the surface of the M-poly(GMA) sample was found to be 3.46 mmol/g by using perchloric acid titration. The specific surface area of the M-poly(GMA) beads was determined to be 3.2 m(2)/g. The equilibrium swelling ratio was 52%. The volume fraction of magnetite nanopowder in the M-poly(GMA) beads was found to be 4.5%. The g factor, that can be considered as a quantity characteristic of the molecules in which the unpaired electrons are located, was found to be 2.28 for M-poly(GMA). The external magnetic field at resonance was calculated to be 2055 Gs which was found sufficient to excite all of the dipole moments present in 1.0 g of M-poly(GMA) sample. (C) 2007 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by 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

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available