4.5 Article

In Situ Raman Spectroscopy and DFT Studies of the Phase Transition from Zircon to Reidite at High P-T Conditions

期刊

MINERALS
卷 12, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/min12121618

关键词

zircon; reidite; phase transition; high P-T experiment; diamond anvil cell; in situ Raman spectroscopy; density functional theory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Zircon provides a favorable pressure environment for ultra-high-pressure metamorphic minerals. The kinetics of the zircon-reidite phase transition at relatively low temperatures were investigated, and it was found that there is a significant kinetic effect and sufficient energy driving force for the transition. These findings are important for understanding the dynamics of crust exhumation.
Zircon (ZrSiO4) provides a good pressure-holding environment for ultra-high-pressure metamorphic minerals during crust exhumation due to its high incompressibility and chemical stability. At high pressure, the zircon can transform to reidite. Previous studies show much higher phase-transition pressures at room temperature than those at high temperature (>1000 K) due to kinetic hindrance. To further investigate the kinetics of the zircon-reidite phase transition at relatively low temperatures, the phase boundary at 298-800 K was determined using a diamond anvil cell combined with in situ Raman spectra. The results show that reidite becomes thermodynamically more stable compared with zircon at 8 GPa at room temperature, and the slope of the phase boundary at 298-800 K abruptly differs from that of previous studies at 1100-1900 K. Compared with the equilibrium phase boundary calculated by the density functional theory, it indicates that the kinetic effect of the zircon-reidite phase transition is obvious, and there exists a sufficiently large energy driving force provided by an overpressure to overcome the activation energy barrier below a critical temperature of approximately 880 K. The temperature dependence of overpressure is about 0.023 GPa/K.

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