Application of Heat Treatment to Optimize the Magnetostrictive

E. E. Ivasheva; Ивашева Е. Е.; V. S. Leontiev; Леонтьев В. С.; M. I. Bichurin; Бичурин М. И.; V. V. Koledov; Коледов В. В.

doi:10.31857/S0033849423040034

Application of Heat Treatment to Optimize the Magnetostrictive

作者: Ivasheva E.E.¹, Leontiev V.S.¹, Bichurin M.I.¹, Koledov V.V.²
隶属关系:
1. Yaroslav-the-Wise Novgorod State University
2. Kotelnikov Institute of Radioengineering and Electronics of RAS
期: 卷 68, 编号 4 (2023)
页面: 396-398
栏目: К 90-ЛЕТИЮ ВЛАДИМИРА ГРИГОРЬЕВИЧА ШАВРОВА
URL: https://cardiosomatics.ru/0033-8494/article/view/650562
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S0033849423040034
EDN: https://elibrary.ru/PETZWT
ID: 650562

如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取

##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问

订阅或者付费存取

详细
作者简介
参考
补充文件
统计

详细

The heat treatment effect of the magnetostrictive component in magnetoelectric (ME) composites consisting of a piezoelectric and magnetostrictive material has been studied. The dependence of the ME voltage coefficient on frequency was experimentally found without heat treatment and with annealing from 200 to 500°C of the AMAG493 amorphous alloy, which acted as a magnetostrictive component. It is shown that with an increase in the processing temperature of an amorphous alloy, an increase in the ME voltage coefficient is observed: the maximum value of the ME coefficient was observed at a temperature of 350°C and amounted to 29.52 V cm–1 Oe–1 at a resonance frequency of 54 kHz. It has been proven that the increase in the ME voltage coefficient occurs due to the improvement in the characteristics of the amorphous alloy during heat treatment, which leads to partial nanocrystallization of the material.

关键词

magnetoelectric composites, piezoelectric and magnetostrictive materials, voltage coefficient

参考

Bichurin M.I., Petrov V.M., Petrov R.V., Tatarenko A.S. Magnetoelectric Composites. Singapore: Pan Stanford Publishing Pte. Ltd., 2019.
Nan C.-W., Bichurin M.I., Dong S. et al. // J. Appl. Phys. 2008. V. 103. № 3. P. 031101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2836410
Wang Y., Gray D., Berry D. et al. // Adv. Mater. 2011. V. 23. № 35. P. 4111. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201100773
Bichurin M., Petrov R., Sokolov O. et al. // Sensors. 2021. V. 21. № 18. P. 6232. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21186232
Wang Y., Li J., Viehland D. // Mater. Today. 2014. V. 17. № 6. P. 269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2014.05.004
Dong S., Liu J.-M., Cheong S.W., Ren Z. // Adv. Phys. 2015. V. 64. № 5–6. P. 519. https://doi.org/10.1080/00018732.2015.1114338
Palneedi H., Annapureddy V., Priya S., Ryu J. // Actuators. 2016. V. 5. № 1. Article No. 5010009. https://doi.org/10.33990/act5010009
Chu Z., Pourhosseiniasl M., Dong S. // J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2018. V. 51. № 24. P. 243001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6463/aac29b
Leung C.M., Li J., Viehland D., Zhuang X. // J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2018. V. 51. № 26. P. 263002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6463/aac60b
Deng T., Chen Z., Di W. et al. // Smart Mater. Struct. 2021. V. 30. № 8. P. 085005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-665X/ac0858
Katakam S., Hwang J.Y., Vora H. et al. // Scripta Mater. 2012. V. 66. № 8. P. 538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2011.12.028
Jiang W.H., Atzmon M. // Scripta Mater. 2006. V. 54. № 4. P. 333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.09.052
Datta A., Nathasingh D., Martis R.J. et al. // J. Appl. Phys. 1984. V. 55. № 6. P. 1784.https://doi.org/10.1063/1.333477