The graph shows that the M is gradually increasing. From here how can I calculate the saturation magnetization?
Is there any standard process to calculate it? Please give me clear idea about it.
HI,
The sample has a mixture of superparamagnetic and paramagnetic grains. There are two methods,
1) The curve shown here is not saturating, because of considerable paramgnetic contributions. Apply paramagentic correction in the hysteresis curve. This can be easily done in the software you are using for visualizing the curve, or the paleomagnetic correction value can be fed in the magnetometer.
2) The other is to plot IRM curve and calculate the saturation magnetization.
Please have a look at "2.8.3. FOURIER ANALYSIS OF HYSTERESIS LOOPS" in the LISA TAUXE_ Paleomagnetism Principles & Practice.
Dear Mr. Nirmalendu Patra,
It seems your hysterezis loop is very narrow. So, you can try to use directly Langevin or Brillouin function to approximate the positive branch of it (where H>=0) - as first step.
But if you want "right" approximation, you should measure initial magnetization curve M(H) after zero-field cooling. From approximation by Langevin function you can get parameters N (quantity of magnetic particles) and MUeff (effective magnetic moment of each magnetic particle). The product N*MUeff will give you saturated value of magnetization.
In case you failed with this, as next step of approximation you can try to remove from your data the slope, which coming from some subsystem of you sample and has linear dependence from magnetic field. For details about this correction please have a look attached publication (in our case linear-with-field subsystem was antiferromagnetic matrix). After this correction you can approximate again with Langevin function.
Article Exchange bias phenomenon in (Nd1-xYx)2/3Ca1/3MnO3 (x = 0; 0....
It seems your Magnetization is not saturating even at the fields of 50 kOe. Also it is non linear at high field portion. So at best you can quote the induced magnetization at the highest field value that you could go. But it is not the saturation magnetization. It is forced magnetization with field specific.
What I would do is as followed;
1. Plot a graph of M vs H from 3 tesla to 5 tesla.
2. Do a linear fit for that aforementioned curve and extract the slope.
3. Use that extracted slope, compute new M with slope multiplying H.
4. Use the original M that you obtained, minus the M computed in step 3.
5. Then, you obtained your M without paramagnetic/diamagnetic contribution.
Hope this helps.
- Badges
- Science topic