4.5 Article

Crystal chemistry of the magnetite-ulvospinel series

期刊

AMERICAN MINERALOGIST
卷 94, 期 1, 页码 181-189

出版社

MINERALOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.2138/am.2009.3002

关键词

Spinel; Mossbauer spectroscopy; crystal synthesis; crystal structure

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spinet single crystals of 19 compositions along the magnetite-ulvospinel join were synthesized by use of a flux-growth method. To obtain quantitative site populations. the crystals were analyzed by single-crystal X-ray diffraction, electron-microprobe techniques, and Mossbauer spectroscopy. All results were processed by using an optimization model. The unit-cell parameter, oxygen fractional coordinate. and tetrahedral bond length increase with increasing ulvospinel component, whereas the octahedral bond length decreases marginally. These changes result in sigmoidal crystal-chemical relationships consistent with cation substitutions in fully occupied sites. As a first approximation. the Akimoto model (T)(Fe(1-X)(3+)Fe(X)(2+))(M)(Fe(2+)Fe(1-X)(3+)Ti(X))O(4) describes the cation substitutions. Deviations from this model can be explained by an electron exchange reaction (T)Fe(2+) + (M)Fe(3+) = (T)Fe(3+) + (M)Fe(2+), which causes (M)Fe(2+) not equal 1 and (T)Fe(2+)/Ti not equal 1. The resultant S-shaped trends may be related to a directional change in the electron exchange reaction at Ti approximate to 0.7 apfu. In general, variations in structural parameters over the whole compositional range can be split into two contributions: (1) a linear variation due to the (T)Fe(3+) + (M)Fe(3+) = (T)Fe(2+) + (M)Ti(4+) chemical substitution and (2) non-linear variations caused by the internal electron exchange reaction. In accordance with bond-valence theory, strained bonds ascribable to steric effects characterize the structure of magnetite-ulvospinel crystals. To relax the bonds and thereby minimize the internal strain under retained spinel space group symmetry, the electron exchange reaction occurs.

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