Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T20:59:04.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conductivity relaxation in the interfacial phase of iron core–iron oxide shell nanocomposites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2006

S. Basu ,
J.R. Macdonald  and
D. Chakravorty
S. Basu*
Affiliation:
Unit on Nano Science and Technology, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Kolkata–700032, India
J.R. Macdonald
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3255
D. Chakravorty
Affiliation:
Unit on Nano Science and Technology, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Kolkata–700032, India
*
a) Address all correspondence to this author. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The alternating current electrical conductivity of a gel-derived glass of composition 55Fe2O3⋅45SiO2 (mol%) was measured over a frequency range of 100 Hz to 6 MHz. The gel was subjected to a reduction treatment at 923 K for ½ h and subsequently heated in ordinary atmosphere at a temperature 773 K for ½ h to grow a Fe-core Fe3O4 shell nanostructure with a median diameter of 6.2 nm. This formed a percolative network within the silica gel. Mossbauer spectra confirmed the presence of Fe3O4 in the nanoshell. Electrical measurements were also carried out on these nanocomposites at different frequencies and temperatures. Isothermal electrical modulus data for both reference and treated glass systems were analyzed using both the CK0 and CK1 Kohlrausch-related frequency response models. Reference-glass shape parameter values, estimated by fitting the experimental data to the K0 model at several temperatures, were found to be ∼0.32. Here, the K0 model led to much better fits than the K1 did. However, for the treated core–shell-structured nanocomposite material, both models yielded good fits with consistent but different shape parameter estimates: very close to ½ for the K0 model and ⅓ for the K1 model. In accordance with the structural measurements and with axiomatic topological considerations that predict a shape-parameter value of ⅓ for one-dimensional motion and ½ for two-dimensional motion, it appears that the ∼0.32 value is consistent with one-dimensional motion of charge carriers along the narrow channels of the interconnected iron-rich three-dimensional phase of the reference glass. Further, although the K1-model ⅓ estimates for the treated material also indicate the presence of one-dimensional charge motion at the two-dimensional interface between the two interconnected phases of the reference glass, the ½ K0 estimates for the same material suggest an effective charge-motion dimension of 2. Importantly, comparison of the high-frequency dielectric constant estimates for the K0 reference glass and the K1 treated one clearly leads to the new but physically plausible conclusion that the bulk frequency-independent dielectric constant of about 30 is independent of the treatment.

Keywords

CompositeNanoscaleSol-gel
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 21 , Issue 7 , July 2006 , pp. 1704 - 1711
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Zaslavsky, A., Aydin, C., Luryi, S., Cristoloveanu, S., Mariolle, D., Fraboulet, D., Deleonibus, S.: Ultrathin silicon-on-insulator vertical tunneling transistor. Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 1653 (2003).Google Scholar
2.Gorelik, L.Y., Shekhter, R.I., Vinokur, V.M., Feldman, D.E., Kozub, V.I., Jonson, M.: Electrical manipulation of nanomagnets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 088301 (2003).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Bozhevolnyi, S.I., Volkov, S.V., Leosson, K., Boltasseva, A.: Bend loss in surface plasmon polariton band-gap structures. Appl. Phys. Lett. 79, 1076 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Krishnan, R., Hahn, M.A., Yu, Z., Silcox, J., Fauchet, P.M., Krauss, T.D.: Polarization surface-charge density of single semiconductor quantum rods. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 216803 (2004).Google Scholar
5.Baltz, V., Sort, J., Rodmacq, B., Dieny, B., Landis, S.: Size effects on exchange bias in sub-100 nm ferromagnetic–antiferromagnetic dots deposited on prepatterned substrates. Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 4923 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Morup, S., Frandsen, C.: Thermoinduced magnetization in nanoparticles of antiferromagnetic materials. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 217201 (2004).Google Scholar
7.Keblinski, P., Phillpot, S.R., Wolf, D., Gleiter, H.: Thermodynamic criterion for the stability of amorphous intergranular films in covalent materials. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2965 (1996).Google Scholar
8.Huang, F., Gilbert, B., Zhang, H., Banfield, J.F.: Reversible, surface-controlled structure transformation in nanoparticles induced by an aggregation state. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 155501 (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Das, D., Roy, S., Chen, J.W., Chakravorty, D.: Interface controlled electrical and magnetic properties in Fe–Fe3O4–silica gel nanocomposites. J. Appl. Phys. 91, 4573 (2002).Google Scholar
10.Ngai, K.L., Mundy, J.N., Jain, H., Kanert, O., Balzer-Jollenbeck, G.: Correlation between the activation enthalpy and Kohlrausch exponent for ionic conductivity in alkali aluminogermanate glasses. Phys. Rev. B 39, 6169 (1989).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Elliott, S.R., Henn, F.E.G.: Application of the Anderson–Stuart model to the ac conduction of ionically conducting materials. J. Non-Cryst. Solids 116, 179 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Rao, K.J., Bhat, M. Harish: Investigation of lithium chloride– lithium borate–tellurium dioxide glasses: An example of complex anionic speciation. Phys. Chem. Glasses 42, 255 (2001).Google Scholar
13.Macdonald, J.R.: Scaling and modeling in the analysis of dispersive relaxation of ionic materials. J. Appl. Phys. 90, 153 (2001).Google Scholar
14.Macdonald, J.R.: New model for nearly constant dielectric loss in conductive systems: Temperature and concentration dependencies. J. Chem. Phys. 116, 3401 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Macdonald, J.R.: Comparison and evaluation of several models for fitting the frequency response of dispersive systems. J. Chem. Phys. 118, 3258 (2003).Google Scholar
16.Macdonald, J.R., Basu, S., Chakravorty, D.: Analysis of conducting-system frequency response data for an interfacial amorphous phase of copper-core oxide- shell nanocomposites. J. Chem. Phys. 122, 214703 (2005).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Maity, A.K., Nath, D., Chakravorty, D.: Electrical conduction in nanocomposites of copper in silicate glasses. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8, 5717 (1996).Google Scholar
18.Murad, E., Johnston, J.H. Iron oxides and hydroxides, in Mossbauer Spectroscopy Applied to Inorganic Chemistry Vol. 2, edited by Long, G.J. (Plenum Press, New York, 1987), p. 514.Google Scholar
19.Morup, S., Clausen, B.S., Topsoe, H.: Magnetic properties of microcrystals studied by Mossbauer spectroscopy. Phys. Scr. 25, 713 (1982).Google Scholar
20.Macdonald, J.R., Phillips, J.C.: Topological derivation of shape exponents for stretched exponential relaxation. J. Chem. Phys. 122, 074510 (2005).Google Scholar
21.Macdonald, J.R.: Universality, the Barton Nakajima Namikawa relation, and scaling for dispersive ionic materials. Phys. Rev. B 71, 184307 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Macdonald, J.R.: On two incompatible models for dispersion in ionic conductors. J. Appl. Phys. 95, 1849 (2004).Google Scholar
23.Macdonald, J.R.: Analysis of dispersed frequency response for ionic glasses: Influence of electrode and nearly constant loss effects. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 17, 4369 (2005).Google Scholar
24.Austin, I.G., Mott, N.F.: Polarons in crystalline and noncrystalline materials. Adv. Phys. 18, 41 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar