The XRD patterns of the standard HAP and generated SG1 samples are shown in Figs. 1a and 1b. In compared to the standard sample, all identified peaks on this sample are associated to the hydroxyapatite phase (JCPDS Card, 1994). The lines seen at 865cm-1 and 1400–1500 cm− 1 in the FTIR spectrum of the SG1 sample (Fig. 2) are attributed to 2−CO3 (low C–O area) and 3−CO3 (high C–O region), respectively, indicating carbonate substitution for PO4 in the apatite lattice (Kweh et al., 2002). HPO4 is the band that can be seen around 890 cm (Ishikawa et al., 1999). The XRD pattern and FTIR spectra of the other samples are also very comparable to this one. Calculations according to the Eq. 1 and using the sample XRD patterns were made to obtain the particle size. These results along with the percentage of carbon impurity of the samples are depicted in Table 1.
The structural features of the HAP crystals are visible in SEM images of the samples (Fig. 3). Figure 4 shows the TEM images of the HAP powders prepared via different methods, as well. The crystallinity and morphology of each sample can be seen from these images. The particle size predicted using Scherer's equation is confirmed by SEM and TEM images. The EPR signal strength as a function of absorbed dose for all samples is shown in Fig. 5 for a dose range of 0.1 kGy to 45 kGy.
The particle size and amount of carbon impurity have a crucial impact in EPR dosimetry employing the HA powder, as shown in Table 1 and Fig. 5. According to the Fig. 5 the SG1 with about 30 nm particle size and 0.47% carbon impurity, has the highest EPR response. As a matter of fact, comparing the pairs of SG1, SG2 and MK, As, having the same carbon impurities but a different grain size, as could be predicted, it concluded from Fig. 5 that the sample with larger grain size have a lower EPR response. On the other hand, the samples Mic and SG1 with almost the same grain size and a different carbon impurities (Mic is lower) confirm the aforementioned word about the importance of carbon content in HA samples.
In addition Hy1 and Hy2 synthesized from the same method but they have some different characteristics such as particle size, carbon impurity and crystallinity, then Hy2 with ~ 10 nm particle size and 1.03% carbon impurity has EPR response several times higher than Hy1 with ~ 46 nm particle size and 0.72% carbon.
As mentioned, the samples of Hy1 and Hy2 are both synthesized by the same method and the only difference is in the annealing process, which causes the two samples to have different crystallinity, shape, crystal dimensions and carbon impurity. As can be seen in the SEM images of these two samples (Figs. <link rid="fig3">3</link>-d and 3-h), Hy2 does not have a specific crystalline shape and its crystallinity is very low, while Hy1 has a high crystallinity and its crystalline shape is spherical.
By comparing SG1 (~ 30 nm, 0.47%) and Hy2 (~ 10, 1.03%), from Fig. 5 SG1 has higher EPR response than Hy2 with smaller particle size and higher carbon impurity, this phenomenon shows the morphology and crystallinity effect.
As a result, the size of the crystals, the quantity of carbon in them, as well as their form and crystallinity percentage, all have a role in the EPR response of HAp samples. The dimensions of the samples and the amount of carbon will be essential when the crystallinity and crystal shape of the samples are not considerably different from one another. As the dimensions of the crystals decrease and their carbon content increases, the signal intensity increases.
Overall, samples with smaller particle size and higher carbon impurity have better response. Optimum carbon impurity and morphology effect could be discussed separately.
Table 1
Particle size and carbon content of synthesized HAP samples.
Sample Code
|
SG1
|
Mk
|
BFS
|
AS
|
SG2
|
Hy1
|
Hy2
|
Mic
|
particle Size from Scherer's equation
|
32
|
-
|
22
|
29
|
27.8
|
46
|
10
|
95
|
particle Size from TEM
|
25–30
|
100–300
|
25–50
|
20–300
|
50–175
|
46
|
10
|
150–700
|
Carbon Impurity (%)
|
0.47
|
0.3
|
0.34
|
0.3
|
0.47
|
0.72
|
1.03
|
0.26
|