4.6 Article

Influence of Shell Thickness on the Colloidal Stability of Magnetic Core-Shell Particle Suspensions

期刊

FRONTIERS IN CHEMISTRY
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2018.00201

关键词

Discrete Element Method; computer simulations; core-shell particles; magnetic chains; electrical double layer

资金

  1. Priority Research Centre for Advanced Particle Processing and Transport, The University of Newcastle

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a Discrete Element study of the behavior of magnetic core-shell particles in which the properties of the core and the shell are explicitly defined Particle cores were considered to be made of pure iron and thus possessed ferromagnetic properties, while particle shells were considered to be made of silica Core sizes ranged between 0.5 and 4.0 mu m with the actual particle size of the core-shell particles in the range between 0.6 and 21 mu m. The magnetic cores were considered to have a magnetization of one tenth of the saturation magnetization of iron. This study aimed to understand how the thickness of the shell hinders the formation of particle chains. Chain formation was studied with different shell thicknesses and particle sizes in the presence and absence of an electrical double layer force in order to investigate the effect of surface charge density on the magnetic core-shell particle interactions For core sizes of 0.5 and 4.0 mu m the relative shell thicknesses needed to hinder the aggregation process were approximately 0.4 and 0.6 respectively, indicating that larger core sizes are detrimental to be used in applications in which no flocculation is needed. In addition, the presence of an electrical double layer, for values of surface charge density of less than 20 mC/m(2), could stop the contact between particles without hindering their vertical alignment. Only when the shell thickness was considerably larger, was the electrical double layer able to contribute to the full disruption of the magnetic flocculation process.

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