2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2020.167402
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of the effective anisotropy constant of magnetic nanoparticles – Comparison between two approaches

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this regard, the reason for the reducing the anisotropy constant in CGdFO and DGdFO MNPs is the weak interaction between Gd–Fe which decreased the ratio of orbital to spin moments of 4f electrons and further weakened the spin–orbit coupling . The decreasing trend of coercivity ( H c ) for the processed MNPs due to the lower value of the anisotropy constant ( k eff ), which can be explained via Stoner–Wohlfarth model …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, the reason for the reducing the anisotropy constant in CGdFO and DGdFO MNPs is the weak interaction between Gd–Fe which decreased the ratio of orbital to spin moments of 4f electrons and further weakened the spin–orbit coupling . The decreasing trend of coercivity ( H c ) for the processed MNPs due to the lower value of the anisotropy constant ( k eff ), which can be explained via Stoner–Wohlfarth model …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, in MNPs systems the magnetic anisotropy has contributions from crystal structure, surface [10,15], aspect ratio [16] and even from interparticle interactions [12,17]. There exist several experimental approaches from which the effective anisotropy constant (K eff ) value of a MNPs system could be obtained [8,13,18,19]. Most of these methods are temperature dependent d.c. magnetic field measurements.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…15 The use of different experimental conditions and SAR calculation methods, based on calorimetric data throughout the MFH literature, 15,42 further complicates the collection of representative data to determine the optimal system properties for heating. Limitations also apply to the characterization processes in which different methods are used to determine magnetic core size 43,44 and anisotropy, [45][46][47][48] potentially yielding different correlations of intrinsic properties to respective SAR values of experimental samples.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%