2016
DOI: 10.1134/s2075113316010160
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantitative determination of content of magnetite and maghemite in their mixtures by X-ray diffraction methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is related to the occupancy of the drug in the interlayer space of MLDH. Due to reflections for the magnetite and maghemite phase in the XRD patterns that are very close to each other, it cannot be ruled out that the synthesized samples are composed of a mixture of maghemite and magnetite phases 44 , 45 . However, because the magnetite synthesis was carried out under non-oxidizing conditions, the probability of the presence of the maghemite phase is low.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is related to the occupancy of the drug in the interlayer space of MLDH. Due to reflections for the magnetite and maghemite phase in the XRD patterns that are very close to each other, it cannot be ruled out that the synthesized samples are composed of a mixture of maghemite and magnetite phases 44 , 45 . However, because the magnetite synthesis was carried out under non-oxidizing conditions, the probability of the presence of the maghemite phase is low.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One complication which can arise when identifying magnetite through XRD is due to the similarity of its diffractogram to that of maghemite. Both iron oxides have almost identical lattice parameters and spinel structure (Figure ), and consequently, their respective reflections heavily overlap. , Minor differences in the diffractogram of maghemite exist in the form of additional reflections at 0.373 Å (210) and 0.340 Å (213). These reflections can possibly be used to distinguish magnetite from maghemite, but in reality, their intensities are too weak (∼5%) for the positive identification of the maghemite phase.…”
Section: Identification and Quantification Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[323][324][325][326] Minor differences in the diffractogram of maghemite exist in the form of additional reflections at 0.373 Å (210) and 0.340 Å(213). These reflections can possibly be used to distinguish magnetite from maghemite but in reality their intensities are too weak (~5%) for the positive identification of the maghemite phase.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the first series ( Figure 2 a), the patterns show diffraction lines corresponding to magnetite, Fe 3 O 4 , as the major phase and maghemite (about 20%) (JCPDS no. 01-076-1849) [ 42 , 43 , 44 ]. The average crystallite size calculated using the (311) plane was 22 nm (M1) 29 m, (M1-S1) and 23 nm (M1-S2).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lattice constants were refined using Whole Powder Pattern Fitting (WPPF). The average crystallite size was calculated from the (311) diffraction line using Scherrer’s equation: D = kλ/(β·cosθ) where k = 0.90, λ is the wavelength of X-ray, β is full width at the half maximum (FWHM) of the peak is the diffraction angle [ 42 , 43 , 44 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%