4.5 Article

Structural characterization of the clay mineral illite-1M

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED CRYSTALLOGRAPHY
卷 41, 期 -, 页码 402-415

出版社

INT UNION CRYSTALLOGRAPHY
DOI: 10.1107/S0021889808004202

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work reports the structural characterization of illite-1M from northern Hungary, with the first attempt to refine the structure model and locate the interlayer water molecule. Structural characterization was accomplished using state-of-the-art analytical methods available for clays. The results illustrate the status of techniques for clay structure determination, as well as providing a structural model for illite. The chemical formula for the illite-1M under investigation can be written as K0.78Ca0.02Na0.02(Mg0.34Al1.69Fe0.02III)[Si3.35Al0.65]O-10(OH)(2)center dot nH(2)O. Structure simulations with WILDFIRE yielded a model with 30% of cis-vacant layers and an expandability percentage of 10%. The value of the percentage of expandability was confirmed with NEWMOD, with which the best simulation was obtained with 90% of di-octahedral mica with K (80% site population) in the interlayer region and 10% of expandable layers. The best structure simulation obtained with DIFFaX was also obtained with a population of K atoms of 80%, six cells along c (in agreement with the results of a transmission electron microscopy study) and an average dimension of the particles in the ab plane of 300 nm. Besides the determination of the basic structure unit (the results are consistent with those obtained with the local information provided by a fit of the pair distribution function data) and the model of disorder, refinement with DIFFaX(+) allowed the calculation of a possible position for the interlayer water molecule. Although physically sound, both the observed tetrahedral layer corrugation and the location of the water molecule need further experimental evidence, because the final fit of the observed pattern is still imperfect. The reasons for this misfit are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据