Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:05:18.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of peak choice on the quantitative phase analysis of the Egyptian kaolins using the standardless method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Karimat El-Sayed ,
Z. K. Heiba  and
A. M. Abd El-Rahman
Karimat El-Sayed
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
Z. K. Heiba
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
A. M. Abd El-Rahman
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The “standardless” quantitative phase analysis method proposed by Rius, Plana, and Planques [J. Appl. Cryst. 20, 457 (1987)] was evaluated by applying it to two series of artificial samples. The method was then applied to determine quantitatively the phases present in six different natural kaolin samples from Egypt. Two kaolinite peaks were selected for this analysis: One of them is known to be affected by stacking disorder, the other one is the 001 basal reflection, which is not significantly affected by stacking disorder. The method was also applied to samples of different mesh sizes. The results obtained when using the basal reflection showed that Egyptian kaolin is mainly kaolinite (82%–95%) together with anatase (2%–9%), rutile (1%–6%), and quartz (0.5%–7%). These analyses agreed very well with those obtained by chemical analysis. On the other hand, the analyses of the phases obtained from the peak which is strongly affected by stacking disorder were totally different. It was found also that by decreasing the particle sizes of kaolin samples the phase abundance of kaolinite increases, whereas those of quartz and anatase decrease. The results showed also that the standardless method is only applicable to peaks that are not strongly affected by structural disorder.

Type
Research Article
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 1993 , pp. 206 - 209
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, L. E. (1977). “Fourty years of quantitative diffraction analysis,” Adv. X-ray Anal. 20, 1.Google Scholar
Bish, D. L., and Howard, S. A. (1988). “Quantitative phase analysis using Rietveld method,” J. Appl. Cryst. 21, 86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, J. H. (1985). “Quantitative X-ray diffractometry of carbonate rocks,” J. Sediment. Petrol. 55, 611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiala, J. (1980). “Powder diffraction analysis of a three-component sample,” Anal. Chem. 52, 1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heiba, Z. K., Schaefer, W., Jansen, E., and Will, G. (1986). “Low-temperature structural phase transitions of TbB4 and ErB4 studied by high resolution X-ray diffraction and profile analysis,” J. Phys. Chem. Solids 47(7), 681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, R. J., Howard, S. A. (1987). “Quantitative phase analysis from neutron powder diffraction data using Rietveld method,” J. Appl. Cryst. 20, 467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinckley, D. N. (1963). “Variability in crystallinity values among the kaolin deposits of coastal plain of Georgia and South Carolina,” Clays Clay Miner, 11, 229.Google Scholar
Klug, H. P., and Alexander, L. E. (1974). “X-ray Diffraction Procedures for Polycrystalline and Amorphous Materials” (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
Krajicek, J., Weiss, Z., and Wiewiora, A. (1983). “Kaolins: computeraided X-ray quantitative phase analysis,” 5th Meeting of the European Clay Groups, Prague, 341.Google Scholar
Plancon, A., and Tchoubar, C. (1977). “Determination of structure defects in phyllosilicates by X-ray powder diffraction-II, nature and proportion of defects in natural kaolinites,” Clays Clay Miner. 25, 435.Google Scholar
Rius, J., Plana, F., and Palanques, A. (1987). “Standardless X-ray diffraction method for the quantitative analysis of multiphase mixture,” J. Appl. Cryst. 20, 457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. K., Johnson, G. G., Scheible, A., Wims, A. M., Johson, J. L., and Ullmann, G. (1987). “Quantitative X-ray powder diffraction method using the full diffraction pattern,” Powder Diffr. 2(2), 73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starks, T. H., Fang, J. H., and Zevin, L. S. (1984). “Quantitative X-ray diffractometry using target transformation factor-analysis,” J. Int. Assoc. Math. Geol. 16(4), 351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szabo, P. (1980). “Optimization of quantitative X-ray diffraction analysis,” J. Appl. Geol. 13, 479.Google Scholar
Toraya, H., Yoshimora, M., and Somiya, S. (1984). “A computer program for the deconvolution of X-ray diffraction profiles with the composite of pearson type VII function,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 67, C119.Google Scholar
Weiss, Z., Krajicek, J., Surcok, L., and Fiala, J., (1983). “A computer X-ray quantitative phase analysis,” J. Appl. Cryst. 16, 493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zevin, S. L. (1977). “A method of quantitative phase analysis without standards,” J. Appl. Cryst. 10, 147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar