SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY AT THE AMES LABORATORY

S P R I N G

2008
Ames Laboratory is a U.S. Department 

of Energy laboratory seeking solutions 

to energy-related problems through the 

exploration of chemical, engineering, 

materials and mathematical sciences, and 

physics. Established in the 1940s with 

the successful development of the most 

efficient process to produce high-purity 

uranium metal for atomic energy, Ames 

Lab now pursues much broader priorities 

than the materials research that has given 

the Lab international credibility. Responding to issues of national concern, Ames 

Laboratory scientists are actively involved 

in innovative research, science education 

programs, the development of applied 

technologies and the quick transfer of 

such technologies to industry. Uniquely 

integrated within a university environment, 

the Lab stimulates creative thought and 

encourages scientific discovery, providing 

solutions to complex problems and educating tomorrow’s scientific talent.

Steve Karsjen, Editor

Kerry Gibson, Managing Editor

Saren Johnston and 

Breehan Gerleman Lucchesi, 

Contributing Editors

Grant Luhmann, Art Director

Laura Petersen, Graphic Design Intern

Tiffany Woods, Graphic Design Intern

Copyright 2008 by Ames Laboratory. All 

rights reserved. For additional information 

about Ames Laboratory or topics covered 

in this publication, please contact: 

Editor, Inquiry

Ames Laboratory

111 TASF

Ames, Iowa 50011-3020

515-294-9557

www.ameslab.gov

Inquiry is published biannually by the Ames 

Laboratory Office of Public Affairs. Iowa 

State University operates the Laboratory 

for the U.S. Department of Energy under 

contract DE AC02 07CH11358. Ames 

Laboratory shares a close working relationship with Iowa State University’s Institute 

for Physical Research and Technology, a 

network of scientific research centers.

Contents

F E AT U R E S

8 Bioinspiration 

Bacteria provide a method for synthesizing 

 magnetic nanoparticles.

10 “Beefing” Up Magnets For Electric-Drive Cars New magnet alloy stays strong – even at 200 degrees Celsius. 

12 Good Materials Lead to Good Science Ames Lab interdisciplinary research group seeks to 

 expand material synthesis abilities.

14 Like Water Through a Straw Parallel cylindrical water nanochannels may explain how

 fuel-cell membranes work.

 

15 Payback Time Technology transfer efforts paying off big time.

D E PA R T M E N T S

3 Director’s Letter

4 Awards

6 Education

Cover: These fine, spherical 2-14-1 permanent magnet alloy powders produced by 

argon gas atomization may lead to more efficient and economical electric drive 

motors for ultragreen vehicles. 

15

14

12

10

8
Welcome to the spring 2008

issue of Inquiry magazine.

INQUIRY SPRING 2008 3

et me introduce myself. I’m the new Director of the Ames 

Laboratory. I arrived in Ames at the beginning of the year 

after spending eight years at Purdue University, where I was 

the Head of the School of Materials Engineering. It has 

been a tough winter in the Midwest, and the burgeoning signs of spring are 

even more than usually welcome, but the welcome in Ames has been warm at every 

level throughout the winter.

I am spending some time during my first months here getting to know the Lab and 

its staff, and I am very pleased with what is emerging. There is certainly a good dose of 

“Midwestern modesty” here, and a lot of the work is undersold, but I am finding exciting 

research and exceptional scientific quality in every corner of the Lab. The more people 

I talk to, the more great science I find.

Ames Laboratory has a great working climate and a rich collaborative environment 

in which novel ideas are conceived in fundamental science, tested in theoretical and 

modeling studies, formed into actual materials that you can hold in your hand, and 

then measured with high sophistication to prove the 

original concept. 

You cannot easily find all of those things working 

together as well as they do at Ames Lab. 

As DOE’s Office of Basic Energy Sciences came 

forth with a new set of “scientific grand challenges” for the research community earlier 

this year, we were pleased to find that the Ames Laboratory was already working on 

meeting all of them, and in many cases already has great examples to show.

Energy is grabbing the headlines more than it has since the 1970s as gasoline prices 

keep rising. More and more often we find ourselves challenged to explain how a 

Department of Energy lab with a large Basic Energy Science commitment is contributing 

to meeting the obvious needs. Within these pages, you’ll find examples of cutting-edge 

research that has real potential to provide energy solutions for tomorrow – work that is 

both fundamental and long-term, but has outcomes that enable energy production with 

lower environmental impact or consumption with greater efficiency. There is no single 

“fix” for our energy needs, and there is certainly no quick fix. The energy needs of the 

future will surely be met through a wide variety of different technologies, all of which 

will emerge from fundamental scientific research of the kind going on at the Ames 

Laboratory and its sister labs in the DOE complex. History shows how new technologies most often emerge from new materials, and Ames Lab specializes in designing and 

inventing materials with novel properties.

I’m excited about the science being done at the Ames Laboratory and about the 

potential it has to contribute to our energy future and our economic security. Read on 

for some fascinating examples.

L

From the Director

Alex King, Director
 a 2007-2008 AWARDS

4 INQUIRY SPRING 2008

Gschneidner Acta Materialia Gold Medalist

Karl A. Gschneidner Jr., senior metallurgist at Ames Laboratory, has been awarded the prestigious Acta Materialia 

Gold Medal, considered by many scientists and engineers 

to be the top award worldwide in the field of materials 

research. Gschneidner received the award during the 

2008 annual meeting of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society in New Orleans on March 11, 2008.

The Acta Materialia Gold Medal is just the 

latest of many honors for Gschneidner, who in 

2007 was elected to the National Academy of 

Engineering. The Gold Medal is awarded annually by the Board of Governors of Acta Materialia Inc. with partial financial support from 

Elsevier Ltd. Nominees are solicited each year 

from the Cooperating Societies and Sponsoring 

Societies of Acta Materialia Inc. based on demonstrated ability and leadership in materials research. 

The candidates are placed on a ballot for a panel of 

international judges who select the winner. 

The award consists of an 18-karat gold medal, 

an inscribed certificate and a check from the Board 

of Governors. 

The conference also featured a symposium in Gschneidner’s honor, with the gold medalist delivering the keynote address.

Karl A. Gschneidner, Jr.

Thompson Wins Excellence Award

R. Bruce Thompson, director of the Nondestructive 

Evaluation program at Ames Laboratory, has won the 

Sustained Excellence Award from the American Society 

for Nondestructive Testing’s Research Council.

Thompson, who is also director of Iowa State University’s Center for Nondestructive Evaluation and a Distinguished Professor of materials 

science and engineering and 

aerospace engineering and 

engineering mechanics at 

Iowa State, was nominated by 

Kevin Smith of Pratt & Whitney. 

Smith cited Thompson’s sustained excellence in research in 

the field of nondestructive testing through a long career filled 

with achievements leading to 

significant advancements in the 

state of the art. 

In addition to Thompson’s research achievements, 

mentoring of students and excellent academic credentials, he was also recognized for his exceptional capability 

to perceive the possibilities for how theoretical concepts 

can be applied to industrial concerns.

Bruce Thompson
INQUIRY SPRING 2008 5

Anderson TMS Distinguished Scientist/Engineer

Iver Anderson, senior metallurgist at Ames Laboratory, 

received the 2007 Distinguished Scientist/Engineer Award 

from the Electronic, Magnetic & Photonic Materials Division 

of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society during the society’s annual meeting, March 11, 2008 in New Orleans.

Anderson is only the second person selected for the 

award, which is presented based on a lengthy nomination 

and peer-review process. Anderson was singled out for 

his development of a tin-silver-copper solder alloy that has 

been widely adopted by the electronics industry to remove 

harmful lead from the environment. 

To date, the patented lead-free solder has been licensed 

by some 60 companies worldwide and has generated 

nearly $19 million in royalties for Ames Lab and Iowa State 

University.

The award cites Anderson “for his innovative ideas, his excellent research, his continuing scholarship and the influence 

he has had on the transition to Pb-free manufacturing.”

Corbett Named 2008 ACS Cotton Award Winner

John Corbett, a senior chemist at Ames Laboratory, has 

been selected to receive the American Chemical Society’s 

2008 F. Albert Cotton Award in Synthetic Inorganic Chemistry. Established in 2002, the $5,000 award recognizes individuals who have distinguished 

themselves by demonstrating creativity, imagination and outstanding synthetic accomplishments in 

the field of inorganic chemistry. 

The Cotton Award is funded by the 

F. Albert Cotton Endowment Fund, 

supported by the late F. Albert Cotton, one of the world’s foremost 

inorganic chemists. Corbett is the 

fifth recipient of the award. 

With his selection for the Cotton 

Award, Corbett has now received all three awards in inorganic chemistry given by the American Chemical Society. 

The first was in 1986, when he received the ACS Inorganic Chemistry Award. Then, in 2000, he received the 

ACS Award for Distinguished Service in the Advancement 

of Inorganic Chemistry.

Corbett, who is also an ISU Distinguished Professor of 

Liberal Arts and Sciences and a professor of chemistry, is a 

member of the National Academy of Sciences. 

His research interests lie within the more specialized 

field of synthetic inorganic solid-state chemistry, which he 

says has historically been the “forgotten child” of inorganic 

chemistry. 

Corbett received the Cotton Award at the 2008 ACS 

spring meeting in April in New Orleans, where he presented an award address on his research in inorganic solid-state chemistry, including his investigations into strong 

metal-metal bonding. A symposium in Corbett’s honor followed the award address and included many of his former 

students and postdoctoral associates.

The Midwest Forensics Resource Center at Ames Laboratory is a partner in the newly formed Forensic Technology Center of Excellence that will be headquartered at 

the National Forensic Science Technology Center located 

at the Young-Rainey STAR center in Largo, Fla. 

The competitively awarded cooperative agreement 

is the result of the combined efforts of the five partners 

making up the Forensic Technology Center of Excellence 

who successfully submitted the peer-reviewed proposal. 

In addition to the NFSTC and the MFRC, the Center’s partners include: Stetson College of Law’s National ClearJohn Corbett

Iver Anderson (left) receives his award from Patrice Turchi, 

director of the Electronics, Magnetics, & Photonic Materials 

Division of TMS.

inghouse for Science, Technology and the Law, Gulfport, 

Fla; the University of Central Florida’s National Center for 

Forensic Science, Orlando, Fla.; and Marshall University’s 

Forensic Science Center, Huntington, W. Va. Each partner is responsible for a specific project in support of the 

center’s objectives.

As a partner, the MFRC will receive approximately 

$500,000 to support two projects. The first project will 

target the effective use of process-mapping tools for process improvement, and the second will identify, recruit and 

retain crime laboratories’ scientific staff.

MFRC a Partner in Forensic Technology Center of Excellence
6 INQUIRY SPRING 2008

T’S NOT TRUE THAT “YOU CAN’T GO HOME AGAIN.” 

Just ask Travis Monk, whose journey back to the Ames 

Laboratory involved a couple of years, the completion 

of two degrees and a stay in a foreign country. But in 

the end, at least temporarily, he came home again to 

the Lab, conducting interesting and important research.

Monk was an undergraduate at Truman State University when he arrived at Ames Lab for the first time in May 

2005. He was one of 10 student interns who participated 

in the Lab’s Science Undergraduate Laboratory Internship, 

or SULI, program. During his 10-week summer internship, 

he worked in physicist Kai-Ming Ho’s group where his job 

was to fabricate photonic crystals. 

“It turned out that he (Monk) 

was really among the good people 

we had for undergraduate interns,” 

says Ho. “We quickly added him to 

our active recruit list for graduate 

school at Iowa State.” 

But graduate school at ISU was 

not in the cards for Monk upon 

completion of his undergraduate 

degree at Truman State in May 

2006. Instead, a master’s degree 

in neuroscience rather than physics 

led him thousands of miles away 

from the Midwest. His destination: 

the University of Plymouth in Plymouth, England. In September 2007, 

following one year of intensive 

study and completion of his thesis, 

he graduated from the University of 

Plymouth with a master’s in neuroscience. 

Upon receiving his master’s 

degree, Monk once again found 

himself making decisions about his future. This time, he 

had to decide where to complete his Ph.D. In the end, he 

was accepted into the neuroscience program at the University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, but there was one 

hitch — he couldn’t begin until June 2008. 

 “I had some downtime and I needed a job,” says 

Monk. “So I contacted Dr. Ho with whom I’d worked in 

2005. I told him I needed a couple of months of internI ship, and I was interested in working for him. He offered 

me a job.” 

On Oct. 6, 2007, Monk found himself right back at the 

Ames Lab in an internship involving work on a project similar to the one he’d worked on in 2005. 

“I basically did the same work that I did in 2005, fabricating crystals, but this time focused on one particular 

application for photonic crystals, which is using them as a 

substance-identification device,” he says. 

Monk credits the SULI program with providing him the 

framework to succeed. “I believe it’s because I demonstrated to Dr. Ho that I could do good work while I was 

in the SULI program that he was so willing to offer me a 

job when I asked,” says Monk. 

But that’s not the only reason 

Monk spoke so highly about SULI. The program also 

provided him an opportunity to really figure out what he 

wanted to do. 

“When I arrived at the Lab in 2005, I thought I had my 

career path laid out. I was interested in theoretical physics, 

came here and did a project in experimental physics with 

Dr. Ho, and my career path changed,” Monk says. “I’m living proof that the SULI program really helps.” 

SULI really helps scientists too, says Ho, who credits the 

program with introducing him to a student he’s been able to 

bring back to the Lab to help perform cutting-edge research 

in his program. And although things did not quite work out 

as he’d hoped in that Monk did not decide to come to ISU 

for graduate school, he says the SULI program served its 

“global” purpose, which is to get students like Monk to 

see the value in attending graduate school. 

“It’s a way for students to see what real research looks 

like,” says Ho. “But also it’s a way for scientists to show 

students how much fun it is being a graduate student and 

for us to have a channel to reach top students.” 

Monk’s opportunity at Ames Lab lasted only a few 

months before he was off to New Zealand and the next leg 

of his education journey. But Ho and the SULI program’s 

investment in him is something that will likely resonate 

with Monk his entire career. Is there a chance that Monk 

might find his way back to Ames Laboratory again some 

day? Quoting Monk, “If neuroscience doesn’t work out, I 

can always go back to physics.” 

Q

Former SULI intern returns to Ames Lab

Travis Monk with Kai-Ming Ho

Around the World and Back Again

B Y S T E V E K A R S J E N
EDUCATION

INQUIRY SPRING 2008 7

Ames Laboratory carried on its education tradition hosting the 18th annual 

High School Science Bowl 

and the fifth annual Middle 

School Science Bowl in 

2008. Powered by student 

and staff volunteers from 

the Lab and Iowa State University, the high school event 

drew 48 teams from across 

Iowa on January 26. In April, 

16 teams of middle school 

students competed in a 

two-day event, racing hydrogen fuel-cell cars on Friday, 

April 18, and then answering 

science and math questions 

on Saturday, April 19.

Science Bowl Tradition

High School marks 18th year, Middle School turns five

Cedar Rapids-Marion 

Home Schools won the 

high school event in only its 

second year of competition. 

The team, comprised of seniors Leif Gaebler and Edward Talmage, juniors Evan 

Gaebler and Andrew Baskerville and freshman Alan Talmage, had a perfect record 

for the day. They won all five 

round-robin matches in the 

morning and defeated West 

Des Moines Valley, Ames, 

Home Schools of Eastern 

Iowa and Des Moines Central Academy on their way 

to the championship match. 

Cedar Rapids-Marion was 

coached by Sally Gaebler 

and represented the Ames 

Lab/ISU Regional in the National Science Bowl® May 

1-6 in Washington, D.C.

Evans Middle School 

of Ottumwa edged out 

LeMars 34-26 to win the 

Middle School Science 

Bowl. Council Bluffs St. Albert was third and Home 

Schools of Eastern Iowa 

was fourth. Ogden put on 

a strong finish to beat South 

Hamilton in the hydrogen 

fuel-cell car race portion of 

the competition.

Evans’ victory means the 

school will participate in the 

National Middle School 

Science Bowl for the second time in three years. 

Evans won the Ames Lab/

ISU Regional in 2006 and 

went on to finish fourth out 

of the 25 teams competing in the National Science 

Bowl event that year. This 

year’s team of Lily Elbaum, 

Jianwa Bennett, Sarah 

Beadle, Jacob Huebener 

and Tivy Wixom will travel 

to Golden, Colo., June 19-

22 for the National Middle 

School Science Bowl.

Members of the Cedar Rapids-Marion Home Schools team 

are all smiles as they cruise to victory in the High School 

Science Bowl.

“Catch me if you can,” seems the appropriate quote as the 

Pella Christian team’s car flies across the finish line at the 

Middle School Science Bowl.

Ready, set, GO!

ISU’s Howe Hall became race central for the Middle School 

Science Bowl hydrogen fuel-cell car competition.
H EN IT COM ES TO DESIGN I NG

something, it’s hard to find a better 

source of inspiration than Mother Nature. Using that principle, a diverse, interdisciplinary group of Ames Laboratory 

researchers is mimicking bacteria to synthesize magnetic 

nanoparticles that could be used for drug targeting and 

delivery, as magnetic seals in motors or in magnetic inks 

and high-density memory devices.

Commercial room-temperature synthesis of ferromagnetic nanoparticles is difficult because the particles form 

rapidly, resulting in agglomerated clusters of particles with 

less than ideal crystalline and magnetic properties. Size also 

matters. As particles get smaller, their magnetic properties, 

particularly with regard to temperature, also diminish.

However, several strains of bacteria produce magnetite (Fe3O4) – fine, uniform nanoparticles that have 

desirable magnetic properties. These magnetotactic 

bacteria use a protein to form crystalline particles about 

50 nanometers in size. These crystals are bound by 

membranes to form chains of particles that the bacteria 

use like a compass needle to orient themselves with the 

Earth’s magnetic field. 

To see if researchers could learn from the bacteria, 

Surya Mallapragada, Ames Laboratory Materials Chemistry and Biomolecular Materials program director, pulled 

together a team that included microbiologists, biochemists, materials chemists, chemical engineers, materials 

scientists and physicists from Ames Laboratory and Iowa 

State University. 

As a starting point, former ISU microbiologist Dennis 

Bazylinski, now at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas, 

isolated several strains of magnetotactic bacteria for use 

in the study.

W

8 INQUIRY SPRING 2008

Bacteria provide a method for 

synthesizing magnetic nanoparticles

BY KERRY GIBSON

Bioinspiration

1

2

3

4

Transmission electron micrographs of 1. Magnetospirillum 

magneticum strain AMB-1 with a chain of magnetosomes 

inside; 2. nanocrystalline magnetite chain harvested from lysed 

bacteria (here magnetite nanocrystals are held together by a 

thin phospholipid membrane material after lysis); 3. proteintemplated magnetite nanocrystals of comparable size and 

morphology; 4. cobalt-ferrite magnetite crystals formed using 

conjugated Mms6.
INQUIRY SPRING 2008 9

Based on earlier work by a Japanese research team, 

Ames Laboratory biochemist Marit Nilsen-Hamilton 

looked at several proteins known to bind iron, including 

Mms6 found in magnetotactic bacteria, which she cloned 

from the bacteria. 

“This protein is associated with the membranes that 

surround the magnetite crystals,” Nilsen-Hamilton says, 

“and each bacterium appears to make particles with their 

own unique crystal structure.”

Ames Lab chemist Tanya Prozorov tried synthesizing 

crystals, using the proteins with various concentrations 

of reagents in an aqueous solution, but the particles 

formed quickly, were small and lacked specific crystal 

morphology. At the suggestion of Ames Lab senior 

physicist and crystal growth expert Paul Canfield, the 

team used polymer gels developed by Mallapragada 

and Balaji Narasimhan, who are both Ames Lab scientists as well as ISU chemical engineers, to slow down 

the reaction and help control formation of the nanocrystals 

and minimize aggregation. 

“It’s simple chemistry,” Prozorov says, “and you can 

judge the reaction by the color, watching it go from yellow to green to black as the crystals form. Once the crystals precipitate out, we use a magnet to concentrate the 

particles at the bottom of the flask, then separate them 

out to study them further.”

Prozorov also conducted electron microscopy analysis 

of the synthetic nanoparticles, which showed that Mms6 

produced well-formed, faceted crystals resembling those 

produced naturally by the bacteria. Powder X-ray diffraction studies verified the crystal structure of the particles.

Ames Lab physicist Ruslan Prozorov tested the magnetic properties of the synthetic crystals, which also 

showed striking similarities to the bacteria-produced 

crystals and bulk magnetite. In addition, the magnetic 

studies showed that the “chains” of particles formed by 

the bacteria had a much sharper magnetic transition definition at a higher temperature than single crystals. 

“Nature found a way to beat the thermodynamics (of 

crystalline magnetite) by arranging the nanoparticles in 

such a way that they aren’t affected by temperature the 

way individual crystals are,” Ruslan Prozorov says. 

With this basic understanding of magnetotactic bacteria 

and the ability to synthesize magnetite nanoparticles, the 

team proceeded to find out if the bioinspired approach 

could be used to produce cobalt-ferrite nanoparticles. 

Cobalt-ferrite, which doesn’t occur in living organisms, 

has more desirable magnetic properties than magnetite, 

yet presents the same problems for commercially producing nano-scale particles.

In addition to their previous method, the team took 

the added step of covalently attaching the Mms6 to a 

strand of functionalized polymer known to self-assemble 

and form thermoreversible gels. Because the polymer 

strands come together in a particular way, the attached 

proteins had a specific alignment that the researchers 

hoped would serve as a template for the formation of cobalt-ferrite crystals. And the way in which the gel formed 

would help control the speed of the reaction.

“It worked rather well,” Tanya Prozorov says, “and we 

ended up with very nice hexagonal cobalt ferrite crystals.” 

She adds that she is studying whether the protein will 

also work for the other neodymium, gadolinium, and holmium ferrites.

The research has generated fodder for a number of journal articles, including published works in ACSNano, Physical Review B and Advanced Functional Materials. The next 

phase will involve theoretical physicists who will try to develop a model to explain the experimental results.

“This is an exciting interdisciplinary project addressing some of Basic Energy Sciences ‘grand challenges’ by 

bringing together materials scientists, chemists, physicists 

and biologists to develop new bioinspired materials of 

relevance to DOE’s mission,” says Mallapragada. “Ames 

Laboratory is a wonderful environment in which to foster 

and grow these sorts of interdisciplinary initiatives because teamwork is really built into the culture here.”

For more information:

Surya Mallapragada, (515) 294-7407

suryakm@iastate.edu

Marit Nilsen-Hamilton, (515) 294-9996

marit@iastate.edu

Tanya Prozorov, (515) 294-3376

tprozoro@ameslab.gov

Ruslan Prozorov, (515) 294-9901

prozorov@ameslab.gov

Research funded by:

DOE Office of Basic Energy Sciences, the National Science 

Foundation and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Q

This chain of magnetite particles in M. magneticum strain 

AMB-1 after lysis appears to have a sense of humor or at 

least a friendly disposition.
10 INQUIRY SPRING 2008

New magnet alloy stays strong – even at 200 degrees Celsius

SK IVER ANDERSON ABOUT CONSUMER

interest in and desire for “ultragreen” electricdrive vehicles, and he’ll reply without a moment’s hesitation that the trend is unstoppable 

and growing fast.

The Ames Lab senior metallurgist and Iowa State University adjunct professor of materials science and engineering is playing a major role in advancing electric drive-motor 

technology to meet the enormous swell in consumer demand expected over the next five years. He and his Ames 

Lab colleagues, Bill McCallum and Matthew Kramer, have 

designed a high-performance permanent magnet alloy that 

operates with good magnetic strength at 200 degrees Celsius, or 392 degrees Fahrenheit, to help make electric drive 

motors more efficient and cost-effective. The work is part 

of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Vehicle Technologies 

Program to develop more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly highway transportation technologies that 

will enable America to use less petroleum.

Anderson explains that future ultragreen vehicles include 

fully electric cars, fuel-cell automobiles and plug-in hybrids. 

“They all have electric drive motors, so that’s a common 

A

BY SAREN JOHNSTON

theme,” he says. “It’s important that those motors be made 

economically with an operating envelope that fits how they 

will be driven. The automotive companies in this country 

have set a series of parameters that they would like electric 

motors to meet.”

One of those constraints being addressed by Anderson and his colleagues is the need for permanent-magnet 

electric motors to operate well at temperatures up to 200 

degrees Celsius. “That raised a lot of eyebrows for people 

who know anything about magnets,” says Anderson. He 

explains that the most desirable permanent-magnet materials are neodymium-iron-boron magnet materials based on 

a 2-14-1 crystal structure – Nd2Fe14B. “Most of those types 

of magnets tend to lose a lot of their magnetic energy at 

fairly modest temperatures and are operating at much less 

than half of their power by the time they reach 100 C to 

125 C,” he says. “So our challenge was to design a highperformance 2-14-1 permanent-magnet alloy that would 

operate with good magnetic strength at 200 C.”

Meeting that challenge, Anderson, McCallum and Kramer designed an alloy that replaces pure neodymium with a 

mixed rare earth. “We used a combination of neodymium, 

These fine, spherical 2-14-1 permanent magnet alloy powders produced by argon gas atomization may lead to 

more efficient and economical electric drive motors for ultragreen vehicles. 
INQUIRY SPRING 2008 11

yttrium and dysprosium because they all form 2-14-1 crystal structures,” says Anderson. “Together they have much 

less degradation of their magnetic properties with temperature due to the influence of the yttrium and dysprosium. 

Our concept, put forth in our patent application, is that the 

mixed rare earth 2-14-1 phase would have a lower temperature coefficient.” (The relative change of a physical 

property, e.g., coercivity, when the temperature is changed 

by 1 Kelvin.)

Once they had tweaked the new alloy to perfection, the 

researchers next processed it into a fine, spherical powder form using gas atomization, a technique in which kinetic energy from supersonic jets of gas is transferred to 

a stream of liquid metal, causing it to break up into droplets. “This method best fits the needs of the automobile 

industry because they want to make their motors by a very 

high-volume manufacturing process, and that method is 

injection molding,” explains Anderson. Injection molding 

forms objects from a blended mixture of plastic and metal 

powder by heating this molding compound to a fluid state 

and injecting it into a mold.

Stressing the importance of being able to use the injection-molding manufacturing process, Anderson says, 

“Currently, each magnet making up the magnet array in an 

electric motor is glued in by hand. That’s fine for small runs 

of 50,000 automobiles, but try doing that for the millions of 

cars with electric drive motors – one for the front and one 

for the back – that consumers will want to buy in the next 

10 years,” he says. “It’s not going to work.”

Anderson and his colleagues have been refining and 

pushing the 2-14-1 alloy composition to be more suitable 

for the rapid solidification that happens in the atomized 

powder droplets and, ultimately, for the injection-molding 

process. “We’ve succeeded in getting very nice properties 

for these fine spherical powders,” he says. He notes that 

in comparing their powders to spherical commercial powders of larger size, he and his colleagues look at the “crossover temperature” at which the properties of their magnet 

powders become better than the commercial powders for 

higher temperature uses. “It used to be 175 C,” he says, 

“but now we’ve moved that crossover temperature down 

to the neighborhood of 75 C, which is a tremendous accomplishment. We’re very happy about that.”

Anderson says they now have what they think is a really good alloy, and also have switched from helium gas 

to argon gas in the atomization process, which makes the 

powder-making process a lot cheaper. “That’s a move 

in the right direction for the purposes of commercialization,” he says, “and that’s what we’ve been driving for.” 

(No pun intended.)

Reflecting on the goals of the Vehicle Technologies Program, Anderson says, “We need to support our auto companies and help them develop better products. We can do 

that by getting things worked out at the basic science end 

– that’s our job.” 

Summing up the effort he and his colleagues have 

made in that regard, he adds, “You can think of this alloy 

design work as the fundamental end of extending the temperature range of 2-14-1 magnet alloys. Then, we’re also 

working on the process end, which is a fundamental rapid 

solidification effort to develop the solidified microstructure 

that will carry the best magnetic properties over in a form 

that can be mass-produced. You can call this ‘use-inspired’ 

research, for sure. And there’s an urgent need for this in 

our society.” 

For more information:

Iver Anderson, (515) 294-9791

andersoni@ameslab.gov

Research funded by:

DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy Office

 Vehicle Technologies Program,

Power Electronics and Electrical 

Machines Program

Q

 Pictured with the high-pressure gas atomization equipment 

used to produce the powdered metal are: (from left) Matt 

Kramer, Kevin Dennis, Iver Anderson, Nathaniel Oster (top), 

Wei Tang, Yaqiao Wu and Bill McCallum.
12 INQUIRY 2008

MES LABORATORY EXPERTS IN MATERIALS

synthesis and characterization have joined forces in a new research group to advance the Lab’s 

ability to grow and study high-purity, high-quality 

crystal samples. 

Materials and Engineering Physics Program Director 

Thomas Lograsso, senior physicist Paul Canfield and senior 

metallurgist Bill McCallum have formed the Rational Growth, 

Control and Modification of Novel Materials research group 

to close the loop between materials characterization and 

synthesis and, ultimately, expand the range of techniques 

for growing and studying materials.

Lograsso sat down with Inquiry to discuss the new research team.

Inquiry: What are the overall goals of the new 

Rational Growth, Control, and Modification of Novel 

Materials group?

Lograsso: Ames Lab was founded on high-purity synthesis, 

and we’ve maintained a high level of expertise and experience. Whether it’s the rare-earth metals or any other material, we pride ourselves on knowing that we are doing the 

best science on the best materials. And, if we come to find 

out that materials can be improved, then we improve them 

to make sure that high-quality materials continue to be our 

unique niche. I think the continued focus on producing the 

best materials is the most important and exciting thing that 

will come out of this new research group. 

So we’re bringing together characterization and synthesis 

so we can more easily make the connection between the 

best science and the best materials. Good materials lead to 

good science. But, doing good science on bad samples is 

just as easy as doing good science on good samples. The 

difficult part is getting the good samples. That’s where the 

new Rational Growth research group comes in. 

It’s rare to have all the tools and expertise in one spot like 

we have here at Ames Lab. 

Paul Canfield brings his expertise in solution growth of 

single crystals and in characterization of thermodynamic, 

magnetic and transport properties of materials. Bill McCallum also has expertise in those types of characterization 

methods, and he has experience developing processing 

techniques. I will focus on enhancing several types of synthesis methods and offer my expertise in single-crystal characterization like X-ray diffraction. We each bring a different 

set of skills to the table to form this interdisciplinary group.

Our effort combines broad research interests that cover 

a wide range of physical phenomena and 

ground states, prope r t y m e c h a n i s m s 

and methods to manipulate that property. 

Among the three of us, 

we also have a diversity 

of material growth techniques, extensive experience in developing new growth techniques and pushing 

the limits of the ones we already have, and a broad range 

of characterization techniques that we can use to inform the 

material design, growth and discovery process.

With that in mind, we have three main goals for our 

group. The first is to advance the ability to synthesize and 

characterize high-purity, high-quality materials, mostly in 

single crystal form, and the second is to quantify and control the synthesis-structure-property relationships, which 

are the basic science of how chemical inhomogeneities 

and structural defects affect the properties of responsive 

materials. Third, we want to explore promising phase 

spaces that we see as compelling based on advances in 

synthesis of novel materials.

Overall, we’re focused, as always, on making high-quality 

crystals. But “high quality” means different things depending on what kind of science you are doing. Sometimes 

high quality can mean a crystal with minimal defects or a 

crystal with chemical or phase homogeneity. But, at the 

heart of the term high quality is the processing-structureproperty relationship for any given material. This relationship is always important, but it becomes more important in 

responsive materials, which are the materials we are going 

to work with. 

In the Rational Growth group, we’ve closed the loop between the synthesizer and the characterizer here at Ames 

Lab to help best understand and use the synthesis-structure-property relationships.

Why is bringing together synthesis and characterization important?

The people who make materials must understand how 

synthesis affects structure and properties, and the ability we 

have here at Ames Lab to connect each part of the syntheAmes Lab interdisciplinary 

research group seeks to expand 

materials synthesis capabilities

A

“Good Materials BY BREEHAN GERLEMAN LUCCHESI

 Lead toGood Science”
INQUIRY 2008 13

sis-structure-property relationship is exceptional. It’s not just 

enough to grow a crystal. Characterization of the crystal is 

of vital importance for two different reasons. The first and 

obvious reason is to measure its properties, its structure, 

perhaps the nature of the defects and their population. 

Secondly we need then to utilize this detailed characterization information to improve our control over the synthesis 

process. Such feedback is important, because, again, if you 

are trying to study some particular behavior, some particular 

fundamental question of physics or chemistry, defects in 

synthesized materials are going to affect that measurement. 

And as one gains a better understanding of the origin of 

that behavior, then one begins to ask “how do I control the 

defect(s) that may be affecting that behavior?” So, materials 

behavior is elucidated through characterization, and, in turn, 

characterization has to inform the synthesis methods so that 

you can control and manipulate the materials’ behavior. 

What kind of new possibilities does the Rational 

Growth research effort bring about?

I’ve been collaborating with a lot of other scientists at 

the Lab for years, developing crystal-growth protocols and 

supplying crystals for research. My team could attack specific types of materials, but we were limited somewhat in 

expanding into other areas or searching for new materials 

and new types of synthesis due to a limited 

number of techniques. 

The particular synthesis method or process 

often defines the materials on which our 

group could focus our 

attention.

But now, in the consolidated research group, we can apply what we learn about 

growth mechanisms and have the freedom to expand our 

synthesis methods in a more general way. 

The Rational Growth group will expand into new synthesis techniques not typically done in the Materials and 

Engineering Physics program, such as optical float zoning, 

vapor transport and solution growth, the latter through a 

closer working relationship with Paul Canfield.

And forming this team allows us to submit a proposal for 

advanced crystal growth furnaces that would allow us new 

flexibility in growth parameters and will, I hope, enhance our 

capability to work with a broader range of materials.

Likewise, we are pursuing new opportunities by 

developing those methods required for using reactive materials. Some 

of the reactive materials 

can be difficult to work 

with because they are 

so air sensitive, and the 

Rational Growth team wants to have the capabilities which 

will allow us to do a lot of processing and characterization in 

an inert environment. Again, that opens up combinations 

of elements that we, and many others, have not yet been 

able to consider. 

What new synthesis methods do you plan to pursue?

We will advance both the Bridgman and solution growth 

techniques. In the case of the Bridgman technique, I hope 

to gain greater dynamic control over nucleation and growth 

processes that can be optimized to improve uniformity of 

large single crystals.

We will also be looking to advance solution growth with 

the aim to understand the limitations of the technique, such 

as defining growth regimes where proper control of growth 

can be exercised. The growth regimes are defined in terms 

of materials and processing parameters, as well as cooling 

rates and composition. As with the Bridgman technique, 

the goal is to manipulate the growth processes to achieve 

single crystals of the desired scientific quality. 

We’d also like to expand our repertoire of growth methods to include physical vapor transport. This technique is 

particularly useful in the synthesis of materials containing 

volatile constituents, such as arsenic, tellurium, etc. Gaining 

expertise in handling these components will open up new 

possibilities in research of superconductors, thermoelectrics 

and other energy-related materials. 

How does the Materials Preparation Center fit in 

with your effort?

The MPC is a crucial part of our team’s research, and 

we have interacted closely in the past and will continue to 

do so. The MPC provides the purification processes and 

other processing to support our research team’s goals. The 

materials and synthesis protocols we discover in the Rational Growth group are then, in turn, transferred into the 

MPC, where we can make these materials available to the 

broader DOE community and researchers worldwide. 

Q
how water and protons can so easily diffuse through 

Nafion®, “almost as easily as water passing through water,” Schmidt-Rohr says.

To unlock the structure mystery, Schmidt-Rohr turned 

to mathematical modeling of small-angle X-ray and neutron scattering, or SAXS/SANS. X-ray or neutron radiation 

is scattered by the sample and the resulting scattering 

pattern is analyzed to provide information about the size, 

shape and orientation of the components of the sample 

on the nanometer scale.

Using an algorithm known as multidimensional Fourier 

transformation, Schmidt-Rohr was able to show that his 

model of long, densely packed channels closely matches 

the known scattering data of Nafion®. Mathematical 

modeling of other proposed structures, in which the water clusters have other shapes or connectivities, did not 

match the measured scattering curves.

“Our model also helps explain how conductivity continues even well below the freezing point of water,” 

Schmidt-Rohr says. “While water would freeze in the 

larger channels, it would continue to diffuse in the smaller-diameter pores.”

Schmidt-Rohr adds that additional analysis is needed to determine how the cylinders connect through 

the membrane.

For more information:

Klaus Schmidt-Rohr, (515) 294-6105

srohr@iastate.edu

Research funded by:

DOE Office of Basic Energy Sciences

14 INQUIRY SPRING 2008

Q

UEL-CELL CARS ARE REACHING COMMERCIAL 

viability in today’s increasingly eco-conscious 

society, but despite their promise, even scientists have struggled to explain just how the fuelcell’s central component – the proton exchange 

membrane – really works. 

However, Ames Laboratory chemists Klaus SchmidtRohr and Qiang Chen have offered a new model that 

provides the best explanation to date for the membrane’s 

structure and how it functions. And armed with that information, scientists should be able to build similar fuel-cell 

membrane materials that are less expensive or have different properties, such as higher operating temperatures.

A fuel cell works by pumping hydrogen gas through the 

proton exchange membrane. In the process, the hydrogen gives up electrons in the form of electricity, then combines with oxygen gas to form water as the byproduct. It 

can also work in reverse – when current is applied, water is 

split into its component gases, hydrogen and oxygen.

The model proposed by Schmidt-Rohr and Chen, 

and detailed in the December 2007 issue of the journal Nature Materials, looked specifically at Nafion®, a 

widely used perfluorinated polymer film that stands out 

for its high selective permeability to water and protons. 

Schmidt-Rohr, who is also a professor of chemistry at 

Iowa State University, suggests that Nafion® has a closely 

packed network of nanoscale cylindrical water channels 

running in parallel through the material.

“From nuclear magnetic resonance, or NMR, we know 

that Nafion® molecules have a rigid backbone structure 

with hair-like ‘defects’ along the chain,” Schmidt-Rohr says, 

“but we didn’t know just how these molecules were arranged. Some researchers have proposed spheroidal water clusters, others a web-like network of water channels.”

“Our theory is that these hydrophobic (water-hating) 

backbone structures cluster together,” he continues, “to 

form long rigid cylinders about 2.5 nanometers in diameter with the hydrophilic ‘hairs’ to the inside of the waterfilled tubes.”

Though the cylinders in different parts of the sample 

may not align perfectly, they do connect to create water 

channels passing through the membrane material, which 

can be 10s of microns thick. It’s this structure of relatively wide-diameter channels, densely packed and running 

mostly parallel through the material that helps explain 

F

Parallel cylindrical water nanochannels may 

explain how fuel-cell membranes work

BY KERRY GIBSON

A. Two views of an inverted-micelle cylinder, with the polymer 

backbones on the outside and the ionic side groups lining the 

water channel. Shading is used to distinguish chains in front 

and in the back. B. Schematic diagram of the approximately 

hexagonal packing of several inverted-micelle cylinders. 

C. Cross-sections through the cylindrical water channels 

(blue) and the Nafion crystallites (dark red) in the non-crystalline Nafion® matrix (light red).

A

B

C
Q

INQUIRY SPRING 2008 15

F THE GOAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IS 

to find answers to basic questions, then one of 

its primary objectives is to take what’s learned in 

the laboratory and pass that knowledge along to 

business and industry so mankind can benefit from 

those scientific advances. This transfer of technology is 

what helps keep the United States competitive in the 

global marketplace.

One yardstick for measuring success in transferring 

technology from the lab to the private sector is the amount 

of revenue generated by the licensing of patented technologies. And against that standard, Ames Laboratory has 

achieved whopping success over the past few years.

Ames Laboratory has led the Department of Energy’s 

national lab complex – 17 laboratories – in the amount 

of earned licensing income for the past two years. That’s 

quite an achievement when you compare Ames Lab’s annual budget of $30 million with second-place Brookhaven 

National Laboratory’s annual budget of $445 million. In 

fact, because those revenues exceeded 5 percent of Ames 

Lab’s total annual budget, the Lab has had to turn a portion of that excess back to the U.S. Treasury Department.

“So far as we know, that’s the first time that’s ever 

happened,” says Deb Covey, Ames Laboratory associate 

director over Sponsored Research Administration. “We 

wrote checks for $921,000 in 2006 and $1.03 million 

this past year.”

Covey points out that the earned licensing income is 

revenue based upon use of the invention, usually a percentage of sales or units sold from products that are actually in the marketplace. This differs from total licensing 

income that includes earned licensing income, but may 

also include license issue fees, maintenance fees, milestone payments, paid-up license fees, minimum annual 

royalties and similar fees.

Since record keeping began in 1980, Ames Lab researchers have been issued a total of 212 patents for 

151 different technologies. The most successful to date 

has been the lead-free solder formula developed by senior metallurgist Iver Anderson’s research group. The 

silver-tin-copper solder is licensed to more than 60 companies worldwide and has generated almost $19 million 

in royalties. Various iterations of Ed Yeung’s R&D 100 

award-winning capillary electrophoresis technology have 

also brought in substantial royalties over the years.

“It doesn’t happen overnight,” Covey says. “Lead-free 

solder was originally patented in 1996, and it’s only been 

in the past few years that we’ve seen the major benefits 

of that work. We appreciate that we’ve been lucky and 

that the timing was right to meet a real need.”

At least part of the success of the Lab’s licensing efforts lies with the Iowa State University Research Foundation, which protects intellectual property developed on 

campus, including discoveries at Ames Lab. While other 

larger DOE national laboratories typically have patent attorneys on staff, ISURF files patent applications, licenses 

intellectual property and monitors for patent infringement 

for Ames Lab.

If and when license royalties flow back to ISU, ISURF 

recoups the cost of patenting the invention and takes an 

administrative fee off the top to cover other expenses. One 

third of the remaining money goes to the inventors, while 

Ames Lab and ISU receive 51 and 49 percent of the balance respectively; up to the 5 percent of the Lab’s budget.

“We’re restricted on how we can spend that money,” 

Covey says. “It has to be used for science, education 

or tech transfer, and it’s primarily for new science.” She 

adds that seed funding for collaborative research is one 

way the Lab has made a concerted effort to encourage 

development of new ideas that may need a proof of concept in order to pursue DOE or other funding.

 “It’s great that we’re able to capitalize on our successes by funding new research efforts,” Covey says. “It 

also demonstrates the importance of protecting the discoveries our researchers make because you never know 

what might be the next big success.”

Payback 

Time

Technology transfer 

efforts paying off big time

B Y K E R R Y G I B S O N

I
Ames Laboratory

111 Technical and Administrative Services Facility

Ames, Iowa 50011-3020

515-294-9557

www.ameslab.gov

A U.S. Department of Energy laboratory operated by Iowa State University

2008