1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Magnetization reversal of two-dimensional superlattices of nanocubes and their collective dipolar interaction effects
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.3466983
/content/aip/journal/jap/108/4/10.1063/1.3466983
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/108/4/10.1063/1.3466983

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

(a) TEM image of the as-prepared nanocubes. It shows a 2D ordered array of the nanocubes with an average side of about 6 nm. (b) HRTEM image shows the lattice fringes of the sample, with the corresponding SAED shown in the inset.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

FC and ZFC measurements recorded in a field of 90 Oe. (a) and curves for sample C. The inset shows an enlarged image from 25 to 55 K. The blocking temperature is . The bifurcation point is defined as . (b) and curves for samples A, B, and C. The inset shows an enlarged image from 25 to 50 K. The blocking temperature for sample A is .

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

(a) calculated from the and curves of sample C presented in Fig. 2(a). The Curie points are determined as, . (b) calculated from the curves of samples A, B, and C. The Curie point determined for sample A is 37.9 K, reduced from 39.0 K for sample C.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Selective curves for (a) sample A, (b) sample B, and (c) sample C.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Temperature dependent coercivity, , for samples A, B, and C. For sample C, a small coercivity is observed even in the temperature range, .

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

FC and ZFC loops measured at . The sample is cooled from 80 K down to 5 K in the applied field of 0 Oe (ZFC) and 50 kOe (FC). The inset is an enlarged view of the low field region.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Saturation magnetization, , for sample C. It is determined from the loops by linearly extrapolating the high field PM behavior to the axis of . The inset is for the reduced function, , normalized to the value determined at .

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

of sample C. The fitting analysis by Eq. (4) is represented by the solid curve and the fitting analysis by the Néel–Brown equation, with , is represented by the dashed-dotted curve.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

of sample B partially diluted in distilled water and fitting analysis by the Néel–Brown equation, with .

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Zeeman energy density, , vs the thermal energy, , at the nucleation field, . The magnitude of 1/slope gives the switching volume, .

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

Curie temperature, and blocking temperature, , for samples A, B, and C. is determined from the maximum of and is determined from the peak position of the curve. The uncertainty reflect one half of the step size in the measurements around the temperature of interests.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jap/108/4/10.1063/1.3466983
2010-08-20
2014-04-24
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Magnetization reversal of two-dimensional superlattices of Mn3O4 nanocubes and their collective dipolar interaction effects
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/108/4/10.1063/1.3466983
10.1063/1.3466983
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM