4.6 Article

Influence of core-shell CoFe2O4-BaTiO3 and CoFe2O4-Bi4Ti3O12 on the magnetic properties

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2022.130113

关键词

Core-shell; Quantitative Rietveld analysis; Magnetic studies; CoFe2O4-BaTiO3; CoFe2O4-Bi4Ti3O12

资金

  1. General Directorate of Academic Personal (DGAPA)
  2. National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) [PAPIIT IT201518]
  3. CONACYT [A1 -S-10890]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The current research focuses on the synthesis of a non-magnetic shell layer on a magnetic core CoFe2O4-X (X = BaTiO3 or Bi4Ti3O12) using a two-step wet chemical method. Various techniques were used to characterize the synthesized samples, and the results showed that the nature of the shell influenced the core-shell formation and magnetic properties.
The current research is focused on the synthesis of non-magnetic shell layer on magnetic core CoFe2O4-X (X = BaTiO3 or Bi4Ti3O12), namely, CoFe2O4-BaTiO3 and CoFe2O4-Bi4Ti3O12 which were synthesized at different ratios by two-step wet chemical methods and characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Energy-Dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM). A Vibrating Sample Magnetometer (VSM) was used to examine the magnetic properties of samples influenced by particle size and morphology. All crystal phases were quantitatively determined by the XRD and refined by Rietveld method. After analyzing the results, it was seen that the nature of shell adhered on the core plays a crucial role in the controlling of core-shell formation impacting on the magnetic properties. The results show that the majority of the samples are presented in BaTiO3 in tetragonal, Bi4Ti3O12 in orthorhombic, and CoFe2O4 in cubic structures. The lattice distortions observed in the samples are associated with the shell dimentions, seeing that the ratio 50:50 was found to be suitable for the formation of superparamagnetic core-shell structure (shell size of similar to 20 nm).

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

4.6
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