Magnetically Induced Structural Difference in Ferrofluids And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright © 2014 by American Scientific Publishers Journal of Nanofluids All rights reserved. Vol. 3, pp. 121–126, 2014 Printed in the United States of America (www.aspbs.com/jon) Magnetically Induced Structural Difference in Ferrofluids and Magnetorheological Fluids Hiral Virpura, Mayur Parmar, and Rajesh Patel∗ Department of Physics, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University, Bhavnagar 364002, India We have prepared ferrofluid using magnetic nanoparticles (∼ 10 nm) and magnetorheological fluid (MR fluid) using micron size (∼ 10 m) magnetic particles. We have observed striking difference in magnetically induced structure formation in both the fluids although both are classifications of magnetic fluids in a broad way. A field induced structural difference in chain formation, labyrinthine pattern, spikes formation (Rosensweig surface instability) and optical diffraction pattern is observed. The induced structural difference is mainly due to the magnetically induced dipolar interaction, field induced viscosity and surface tension in both the fluids. KEYWORDS: Magnetic Fluids, Induced Structures, Dipolar Interactions. 1. INTRODUCTION is between 10% to 40% to produce strong magnetorheo- ARTICLE Magnetic fluids can be classified in to two broad categories logical effect. In MR fluid the field induced aggregation [i] ferrofluid and [ii] magnetorheological fluids. Ferrofluid is a key factor for the magnetorheological behavior of is made up of a single domain magnetic nanoparti- the sample which is reversible. Particle sedimentation is cles (∼ 5–20 nm) dispersed in aIP: suitable 192.168.39.211 carrier liquid, On:1 Tue,one 28 ofSep the 2021 problems 22:21:30 with MR fluid whereas in ferrofluid whereas the MR fluid is made up ofCopyright: a micron size American mag- Scientificthe stability Publishers is long term. To overcome the particle sed- netic particles (∼ 2–20 m) dispersed in oilDelivered like car- byimentation Ingenta one can try to make bidispersed MR fluid.6–9 rier liquid.2 Magnetorheological fluid was introduced in Recently inversion of magnetic force between microparti- 1940’s2 whereas ferrofluid was introduced during 1960’s.3 cles and its effect on the magnetorheology in bidispersed Various applications of MR fluid includes Automotive magnetic fluid is studied.10 MR fluid is a yield stress fluid, clutches, brakes, polishing fluids, seat dampers, prosthetic ferrofluid is does not show field induced yield stress. MR knee damper, actuator systems, shock absorbers, etc.4 The fluid has strong dipolar interaction whereas ferrofluid has basic difference in MR fluid and ferrofluid starts with comparatively weak dipolar interactions as the magnetic their particle size. In ferrofluid the particle size range is susceptibility depends on the volume of the particles dis- about nanometer scale whereas for MR fluid the particle persed. In this paper we report striking difference in mag- size range is in micrometer scale. The magnetic nanopar- netic field induced structural difference such as particle ticles in ferrofluid are single domain whereas in MRF the aggregation behavior, labyrinthine pattern, spikes forma- magnetic particles can be multidomain. Consequently, the tion (Rosensweig surface instability) and optical diffrac- magnetic moment of micron size particles in MR fluid tion pattern and its field induced modulation. The observed is field induced and their Brownian motion is negligible, structural difference is due to the field induced strong dipo- while for ferrofluids the magnetic nanoparticles perform lar interactions, the field induced viscous behavior and sur- intense thermal motion. The field induced particle aggre- face tension in both the fluids. gation behavior in MR fluid is intense and under moderate magnetic field the fluid behaves like a solid due to large 2. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS and thick aggregation of magnetic particles, in ferrofluid the field induced particle aggregation is less intense than Magnetic nanoparticles of Fe3O4 were prepared by classi- 1 MRF, it can produce magneto viscous effect5 butitdo cal co-precipitation method. The mixture of solution con- 3+ 2+ not behave like a solid the fluid behavior remains. The taining ferric (Fe ) chloride and ferrous (Fe ) sulphate volume concentration in MR fluid is generally high and was introduced in alkaline solution. The resulting mixture was continuously stirred for 20 min. at 10.5 pH to allow nanocrystallites to grow in size. Nanocrystallites were ∗Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Emails: [email protected], [email protected] magnetically decanted and washed with distil water several Received: 18 December 2013 times to remove water-soluble impurities. To obtain sta- Accepted: 19 January 2014 ble ferrofluid these nanocrystallites were coated with oleic J. Nanofluids 2014, Vol. 3, No. 2 2169-432X/2014/3/121/006 doi:10.1166/jon.2014.1095 121 Magnetically Induced Structural Difference in Ferrofluids and Magnetorheological Fluids Virpura et al. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Magnetic fluids (MR fluids and ferrofluids) are composed of coated magnetic particles dispersed in a nonmagnetic liquid carrier. Under the effect of magnetic field they form head-to-toe chain like aggregation due to field induced dipolar interactions. The dipole moment of a magnetic par- ticle is proportional to its magnetic core volume with the relation given by m = VH, where V = d3/6 volume of the particle, d is diameter of the particle, is the magnetic susceptibility of the particle, H is the applied magnetic field. The dipole–dipole interaction potential between par- ticles i and j is given by, m · m 3m · r m · r dip = 1 i j − i ij j ij Uij 3 5 (1) 40 rij rij where rij is the displacement vector of the two particles m m and 0 is the vacuum permeability, i and j is the respective dipole moments. The magnetic dipole moment Fig. 1. Microscopic and TEM images of micron size magnetic particles = 3 of the particles can be given as m 4/3am Ms where (Fe3O4 and magnetic nanoparticles (Fe3O4) respectively. am is radius of the magnetic core and Ms is the satura- acid and dispersed in kerosene. The fluid was centrifuged tion magnetization of the particle material. The maximum at 12,000 RPM for 20 min to remove aggregates if any. attraction between the particles is obtained when particle dipoles are oriented head to tail configuration, it is equal to From the magnetization measurements of the ferrofluid, particle size (10.4 nm) and saturation magnetization of the m2 U =−2 0 (2) fluid (250 Oe) were determined. For preparation of mag- max 4 r 3 neto rheological fluid (MRF), commerciallyIP: 192.168.39.211 available On: iron Tue, 28 Sep 2021 22:21:30 particles were used. The initial concentrationCopyright: of magneticAmerican ScientificThe formation Publishers of aggregates is opposed by Brownian nanoparticles in ferrofluid is 4.8% whereas theDelivered concen- by dispersionIngenta and as such, the potential for field induced tration of micron size magnetic particles in MRF it is aggregation versus Brownian dispersion can be expressed 15%. Figure 1 shows the microscopic and TEM images of in terms of a governing dimensionless parameter, known micron size magnetic particles and magnetic nanoparticles as coupling constant, respectively. The visualization of chain dynamics under ARTICLE 2H 2V rotating magnetic field is observed using Magnus MLX = 0 (3) 12k T microscope. The magnification used is 100×. CCD cam- B era used is Samsung (BW-360CD) attached with the per- where 0 and H are free space permeability and applied sonal computer. The sample is placed at the centre of the magnetic field respectively. T and kB are absolute tem- pairs of Helmholtz coils to generate homogeneous mag- perature and Boltzmann constant. For 1 aggregation netic field up to 200 Oe in the plane of image. For spikes is highly favoured and 1 dispersion is favoured. Cal- formation (Rosensweig instability) and labyrinthine pat- culating its value for typical field strength of 10 kA/m tern observation, a layer of ferrofluid and MR fluid is and the susceptibility of iron particles with 10 m diam- mixed with miscible liquid and exposed to the perpendic- eter that is in the order of 108.5 Whereas for ferrofluid, ular magnetic field. An illuminating light is kept above it is approximately less than 5. The high value of makes the patter for the better visibility of the event. A capillary obvious that a strong tendency towards formation of chains viscometer having length 40 mm and diameter 0.5 mm and agglomerates is typical for a magnetorheological effect is calibrated at 25 C using three fluids: water, benzene, in MR fluids. and kerosene. Electromagnets were used to generate mag- Figure 2 shows the magnetic field induced chain for- netic field. The uncertainty involved in the viscosity mea- mation in ferrofluid and MR fluid at 500 Oe. It shows surement is ± 0.02 cP checked using standard samples. clear striking difference in a field induced aggregation in A He–Ne laser beam is passed through both the samples ferrofluid and MR fluid. It is visible that in ferrofluid the (after necessary dilution) for the detection and modulation size of the chain, distance between chains, formation of of diffraction pattern. For magnetic modulation of diffrac- multiple chain, shape of the chain like aggregate is quite tion pattern an electromagnet is used. The optical path different than that for MR fluid, for MR fluid the aggre- length of the sample is kept 2 mm. The observed on screen gation is caused by the association of multiple chains, diffraction pattern is recorded using CCD camera and a with structure of oblate shape in the direction of field, dis- computer. tance between chain is quite less, hence the dipolar forces 122 J. Nanofluids, 3, 121–126, 2014 Virpura et al. Magnetically Induced Structural Difference in Ferrofluids and Magnetorheological Fluids (a) Fig. 2. Magnetic field induced chain formation in ferrofluid and MR fluid at 500 Oe. The chains in ferrofluid are much thinner and chain separation is more than that of in MR fluid suggesting that field induced aggregation dynamics is quite different.