4.6 Article

Structural and Magnetic Phase Transformations of Hydroxyapatite-Magnetite Composites under Inert and Ambient Sintering Atmospheres

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 119, 期 12, 页码 6539-6555

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp5114027

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST), Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Govt. of India
  2. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) [09/079 (2501)/2011-EMR-I]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present work reports the impact of sintering conditions on the phase stability in hydroxyapatite (HA) magnetite (Fe3O4) bulk composites, which were densified using either pressureless sintering in air or by rapid densification via hot pressing in inert atmosphere. In particular, the phase abundances, structural and magnetic properties of the (1-x)HA-xFe(3)O(4) (x = 5, 10, 20, and 40 wt %) composites were quantified by corroborating results obtained from Rietveld refinement of the X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and Mossbauer spectroscopy. Post heat treatment phase analysis revealed a major retention of Fe3O4 in argon atmosphere, while it was partially/completely oxidized to hematite (alpha-Fe2O3) in air. Mossbauer results suggest the high-temperature diffusion of Fe3+ into hydroxyapatite lattice, leading to the formation of Fe-doped HA. A preferential occupancy of Fe3+ at the Ca(1) and Ca(2) sites under hot-pressing and conventional sintering conditions, respectively, was observed. The lattice expansion in HA from Rietveld analysis correlated well with the amounts of Fe-doped HA determined from the Mossbauer spectra. Furthermore, hydroxyapatite in the monoliths and composites was delineated to exist in the monoclinic (P2(1)/b) structure as against the widely reported hexagonal (P6(3)/m) crystal lattice. The compositional similarity of iron doping in hydroxyapatite to that of tooth enamel and bone presents HA-Fe3O4 composites as potential orthopedic and dental implant materials.

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