arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 1302.5664cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.dis-nn
收藏

石墨和CeSb2的低温specific heat:准绝热连续方法的验证

Low-temperature specific heat of graphite and CeSb2: Validation of a quasi-adiabatic continuous method

T. Pérez-Castañeda, J. Azpeitia, J. Hanko, A. Fente, H. Suderow, M. A. Ramos

摘要:

本文介绍了一种快速准绝热连续方法在测量4 He温度下比热中的应用,该方法可用于广泛的材料研究。该技术可以在用于弛豫方法的相同配置中执行,因为在4.2K下量热池和热沉之间的典型时间常数被选择为τ ~30 s的量级。通过将绝对值与在相同样品中获得的弛豫法结果(使用相同设置在原位进行)进行比较,测试了绝对值的准确度,在整个温度范围内绝对值之间的偏差< 3%。这种新版本的低温连续量热方法使我们能够在几个小时内以高密度的数据点完全表征和测量样品,而采用其他方法时,我们通常需要几天。已对待检测的重现性进行了详尽研究。在目前的工作中,我们已经将这种方法应用到两种不同的物质:CeSb 2,它具有三个磁转变在15.5 K,11.7 K和9.5 K,和石墨,高取向热解石墨(HOPG)和天然晶体。我们对这些石墨的结果进行了讨论,与以前发表的数据不同种类的石墨样品进行比较。

英文摘要:

We present the application of a fast quasi-adiabatic continuous method to the measurement of specific heat at 4He temperatures, which can be used for the study of a wide range of materials. The technique can be performed in the same configuration used for the relaxation method, as the typical time constants between calorimetric cell and thermal sink at 4.2 K are chosen to be of the order of tau~30 s. The accuracy in the absolute values have been tested by comparing them to relaxation-method results obtained in the same samples (performed in situ using the same set-up), with a deviation between the absolute values < 3% in the whole temperature range. This new version of the continuous calorimetric method at low temperatures allows us to completely characterize and measure a sample within a few hours with a high density of data points, whereas when employing other methods we typically need a few days. An exhaustive study has been performed for reproducibility to be tested. In the present work, we have applied this method to two different substances: CeSb2, which exhibits three magnetic transitions at 15.5 K, 11.7 K and 9.5 K, and graphite, both highly-oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) and natural crystals. Our results on these graphites are discussed in comparison with previous published data on different kinds of graphite samples.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑