Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T19:06:50.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enhanced production of magnesium silicates from strained magnesia1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

W. F. Bush  and
W. O. Williamson
W. F. Bush
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic Technology, College of Mineral Industries, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
W. O. Williamson
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic Technology, College of Mineral Industries, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Mechanically strained, in contrast to annealed, MgO produced greater yields of forsterite and protoenstatite by solid-state reaction with a quartz–cristobalite mixture at 1200–1400° C. The specific surfaces of the strained and of the annealed MgO were similar. The strained MgO was more hygroscopic and similarity of the surface free energies was thus unlikely. The difference in the amounts of silicates produced from the two types of MgO decreased as the temperatures of synthesis increased. This was ascribed to loss of strain energy by unavoidable annealing before and after these temperatures had been reached.

Similar results were obtained when hydrated silica was substituted for the quartz-eristobalite mixture, but more forsterite was produced.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 35 , Issue 269 , March 1965 , pp. 177 - 188
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1965

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.)

Footnotes

2

Present Address: Ferro Corporation, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A.

1

Contribution No. 63-13 from the College of Mineral Industries, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa.

References

Alderman, (A. R.), 1959. Journ. Proc. Roy. Soc. New South Wales, vol. 92, p. 99.Google Scholar
Barr, (L. W.), Hoodless, (I. M.), Morrison, (J. A.), and Rudham, (R.), 1960. Trans. Faraday Soc., vol. 56, p. 697.Google Scholar
Beilby, (Sir George), 1921. Aggregation and flow of solids: London, Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
Bratton, (R. J.), 1961. M.S. thesis, Department of Ceramic Technology, Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Brindley, (G. W.), 1961. Quantitative analysis of clay mixtures, Chap. XIV of 'The X-ray identification and crystal structures of clay minerals', edited by G. Brown, Mineralogical Society, London.Google Scholar
Buerger, (M. J.) and Wasken, (E.), 1947. Amer. Min., vol. 32, p. 296.Google Scholar
Dachille, (F.) and Roy, (R.), 1960. In 'Reactivity of Solids', edited by deBoer, J. H. et al., Elsevier, Amsterdam, p. 502.Google Scholar
Fordham, (S.), 1949. Discuss. Faraday Soc., No. 5, Crystal Growth, p. 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fyfe, (W. S.), Turner, (F. J.), and Verhoogen, (J.), 1958. Metamorphic reactions and metamorphic facies : Geol. Soc. Amer. Memoir 73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregg, (S. J.), 1958. Active Solids, Chap. 15 of 'Surface Phenomena in Chemistry and Biology', edited by Danielli, J. F., Pankhurst, K. G. A., and Riddiford, A. C., Pergamon Press, New York.Google Scholar
Griggs, (D. T.), Paterson, (M. S.), Heard, (H. C.), and Turner, (F. J.), 1960. Chap. 3, Rock Deformation, edited by Griggs, D. and Handin, J., Geol. Soc. Amer., Mem. 79, p. 21.Google Scholar
Hanoka, (J. I.), 1961. M.S. thesis, Department of Ceramic Technology, Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Harker, (A.), 1950. Metamorphism, 3rd edn, London, Methuen and Co.Google Scholar
Jander, (W.) and Wuhrer, (J.), 1936. Zeit. anorg. Chem., vol. 226, p. 225.Google Scholar
Mccrone, (W. C.), 1949. Discuss. Faraday Soc., No. 5, Crystal Growth, p. 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naeser, (G.) and Scholz, (W.), 1958. Kolloid-Zeits., vol. 156, p. 1.Google Scholar
Naeser, (G.) and Scholz, (W.), 1962. Ber. deut. keram. Ges., vol. 39, p. 106.Google Scholar
Naeser, (G.) Scholz, (W.), and Fiedler, (A.), 1962. Ibid., p. 280.Google Scholar
Parker, (L. H.), 1914. Trans. Chem. Soc., vol. 105, p. 1504.Google Scholar
Samuels, (L. E.), 1960. Research, vol. 13, p. 344.Google Scholar
Sarver, (J. F.) and Hummel, (F. A.), 1962. Journ. Amer. Ceram. Soc., vol. 45, p. 152.Google Scholar
Schairer, (J. F.), 1957. Ibid., vol. 40, p. 215.Google Scholar
Shaw, (M. C.), 1948. Journ. Applied Mechanics, vol. 15, p. 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, (J. V.), 1959. Acta Cryst., vol. 12, p. 515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanson, (H. E.), Fuyat, (R. K.), and Ugrinic, (G. M.), 1954. Standard X-Ray diffraction powder patterns, Nat. Bur. Stds. Circular 539, vol. III.Google Scholar
Swanson, (H. E.) and Tatge, (E.), 1953. Ibid., vol. I.Google Scholar
Turner, (F. J.), and Verhoogen, (J.), 1960. Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology, 2nd edn, New York, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Williamson, (W. O.), 1958. Journ. App1. Chem., vol. 8, p. 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshida, (H.), Liebmann, (B.), and Locke, (K.), 1959. Acta Metallurgiea, vol. 7, p. 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar