4.5 Article

Comparative study of structure and magnetic properties of micro- and nano-sized GdxY3-xFe5O12 garnet

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAGNETISM AND MAGNETIC MATERIALS
卷 412, 期 -, 页码 172-180

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2016.03.090

关键词

Magnetic; Nano materials; Rare earths; X-ray and electronic materials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gadolinium Yttrium Iron garnet (GdYIG) samples with the chemical formula (GdxY3-xFe5O12) (x=0.0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and 1.0) were prepared via two different methods, the standard ceramic method (SC) and the co-precipitation method (CP). The effect of preparation conditions and Gd3+ ion substitution on the phase formation, crystal structure, morphology and magnetic properties were studied. Moreover, the initial permeability pc, and Curie temperature TT were measured for all investigated samples. It was found that, the lattice parameter increases on addition of Gd3+ ion while the porosity decreases for both systems of samples. The crystallite sizes of the samples prepared by the (CP) method are smaller than those prepared by (SC) method. The magnetization Ms decreases while the coercivity He increases by increasing the Gd+3 concentration in both systems of samples. For the samples prepared by the (SC) method the values of Ms are higher than those prepared by (CP) method. Also, it was found that the initial permeability pc, and Curie temperature TT are higher in samples prepared by (SC) method than those prepared by (CP) method. Moreover the magnetic loss (the rate of temperature raise (Delta T/Delta t) in an AC magnetic field) was measured for all investigated samples, which increased with increasing Gd concentration. Furthermore, it was found that the samples prepared by (SC) method have magnetic loss higher than those prepared by (CP) method. It was concluded that the preparation method has great effects on the magnetic properties of GdYIG ferrite. The obtained results were explained in the light of Neel's model. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据