| Literature DB >> 28836138 |
Abstract
Nano-sized manganese ferrites Mn х Fe3 - х О4 (х = 0-1.3) were prepared using contact non-equilibrium plasma (CNP) in two different pH (11.5 and 12.5). The influence of synthesis conditions (e.g., cation ratio and initial pH) on phase composition, crystallite size, and magnetic properties were investigated employing X-ray diffraction (XRD), differential thermal analysis (DTA), Fourier transform infrared (FTIR), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and magnetic measurement techniques. The formation of monodispersed faceted ferrite particles at х = 0-0.8 was shown. The FTIR spectra revealed reflection in region 1200-1700 cm-1 caused by the presence of water adsorbed on the surface of Fe3 - x Mn x O4 micro-granules or embedded into their crystal lattice. The most sensitivity of reflection spectra to the composition changes takes place within a 400-1200 cm-1 range, typical to the stretching vibrations of Fe(Mn)-O (up to 700 cm-1 ), Fe(Mn)-OH, and Fe(Mn)-OH2 bonds (over 700 cm-1). The XRD results showed that the nanocrystalline Mn х Fe3 - х О4 (0 < x < 1.0) had cubic spinel crystal structure with average crystallite size 48-49 A. The decrease of crystalline size with the x increase was also observed.Entities:
Keywords: Characterization, CNP; Chemical precipitation; Combustion; MnFe2O4 spinel; Preparation
Year: 2017 PMID: 28836138 PMCID: PMC6890887 DOI: 10.1186/s11671-017-2268-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Fig. 1The pillar of contact non-equilibrium plasma between the electrode in the gas phase and the surface of the liquid
Fig. 2Dependence of saturation magnetization on cation molar ratio at different рН: 1—рН = 11.5 and 2—рН = 12.5
Fig. 3Dependence of coercive force on cation molar ration at different рН: 1—рН = 11.5 and 2—рН = 12.5
Fig. 4XRD patterns of ferrite obtained at different ratios of components (Table 1): A—Fe3O4, B—MnFe2O4, C—Mn3O4, and D—β-MnO2
Dependence of the main characteristics of products on composition
| Sample number |
| Composition | а, А | Crystallite size, А | TC, °С | Mass loss, % | Literature value а, А |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.3 | Mn1.3Fe1.7О4 | Amorphous | 315 | 11.5 | ||
| 2 | 1.2 | Mn1.2Fe1.8О4 | Amorphous | 315 | 19.6 | ||
| 3 | 1.1 | Mn1.1Fe1.9О4 | Amorphous | 305 | 16.4 | ||
| 4 | 1 | MnFe2О4 | 8.4184 | 48.8 | 320 | 13.4 | 8.51 |
| 5 | 0.9 | Mn0.9Fe2.1О4 | 8.4148 | 52.3 | 280 | 6.7 | |
| 6 | 0.8 | Mn0.8Fe2.2О4 | 8.4148 | 60.9 | 315 | 7.2 | |
| 7 | 0.6 | Mn0.6Fe2.4О4 | 8.4313 | 66.1 | 315 | 5.3 | |
| 8 | 0.4 | Mn0.4Fe2.6О4 | Amorphous | 320 | 15.4 | ||
| 9 | 0.2 | Mn0.2Fe2.8О4 | 8.4075 | 66.3 | 580 | 6.2 | |
| 10 | 0 | Fe3О4 | 8.3750 | 72.3 | 520 | 0 | 8.397 |
Fig. 5Dependence of crystal lattice parameter on cation ratio х
Fig. 6Derivatography patterns of samples synthesized at рН = 12.5
Fig. 7TEM image (a) and SEM image (b) of sample no. 4 set 2
Fig. 8IR reflection spectra of samples with synthesized рН = 12.5 at different cation ratio