4.7 Article

Influence of synthesis conditions on growth of Ni-doped chrysotile

Journal

MICROPOROUS AND MESOPOROUS MATERIALS
Volume 132, Issue 1-2, Pages 239-245

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.micromeso.2010.03.003

Keywords

Ni-doped synthetic chrysotile; Starting materials; Hydrothermal synthesis conditions

Funding

  1. Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo
  2. Universita degli Studi di Torino
  3. Universita degli Studi della Calabria

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ni-doped chrysotile fibers were synthesized in hydrothermal conditions at 300-350 degrees C, 15-200 MPa, 160-312 h treatment times and pH 5-10. The starting materials and run products were characterized by X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD) and by scanning and transmission electron microscopy, both with annexed energy-dispersive spectrometry (SEM/EDS and TEM/EDS, respectively). The growth of Ni-doped chrysotile fibers depends greatly on the starting materials: they are observed as run products only starting from synthetic Ni-doped forsterite. When oxides are used as starting phases, even in the same hydrothermal conditions, the growth of Ni-doped talc is observed. As regards the morphology of synthesized chrysotile fibers, under the conditions of the present work, cone-in-cone crystals were prevalent, but other morphologies were also detected, all showing well-defined crystallinity, as revealed by electron diffraction patterns of selected areas (SAED). Fibers with cylindrical shape showed outer diameters ranging from 37 to 52 nm and a central hollow (empty core) ranging from 6 to 10 nm. The average concentrations of nickel oxide in chrysotile fibers varied from 4 to 11 (wt%). Further characterization by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC)/thermogravimetric (TG) and by mu-Raman spectroscopy allowed to study the effect of Ni doping on the chemical/physical characteristics of the chrysotile fibers. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available