Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T04:17:09.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The development of crystalline structure in aluminium hydroxide polymorphs on ageing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

H. Elderfield and
J. D. Hem
H. Elderfield
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT
J. D. Hem
Affiliation:
U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California 94025
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Infrared absorption spectra of the precipitated solids separated from aluminium-hydroxide solutions below the pH of minimum solubility of Al(OH)3 demonstrate the slow ageing of polymeric Al complexes to gibbsite. On comparison with the spectra of natural gibbsites, shifts in absorption frequency during crystal growth are interpreted in terms of changes in hydrogen bonding as a consequence of deprotonation and stacking of aluminium hydroxide layers to form gibbsite. In alkaline solutions the bayerite polymorph precipitates and IR frequencies are compatible with protonation as aluminate ions associate with the bayerite crystal having a lower crystal energy than its low pH polymorph. The infrared spectrum of nordstrandite, which is probably the stable polymorph in alkaline solution, shows evidence of strongly polarized hydroxyl ions similar to gibbsite.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 39 , Issue 301 , March 1973, pp. 89 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1973

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Frederickson, (L. D.), 1954. Anal Chem., 26, 1883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fripiat, (J. J.), van Cauwelaert, (F.), and Bosmans, (H.), 1965. Journ. Phys. Chem., 69, 2458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fripiat, (J. J.) Bosmans, (H.), and Rouxhet, (P. G.), 1967. Ibid. 71, 1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hathaway, (J. C.)and Schlanger, (S. O.), 1965. Aimer. Min. 50, 1029.Google Scholar
Hem, (J. D.), 1968. US, Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper, 1827B.Google Scholar
Hem, (J. D.) and Roberson, (C. E.), 1967. Ibid. 1827A.Google Scholar
Ishit, (M.), Shimanouchi, (T.), and Nakahire, (M.), 1967. hxorg. Chim. Acta, 1, 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolesova, (V. A.) and Ryskin, (Ya. I.) 1959. Optics and Spectroscopy, 7, 165; transl. of ., 7.Google Scholar
Megaw, (H. D.), 1934. Zeits. Krist., 87, 185.Google Scholar
Rooksby, (H. P.), 1961. In Brown, (G.), editor, The X-ray identification and crystal structure of clay minerals. Min. Soc., London, Ch. X, 354.Google Scholar
Ruppin, (R.) and Englman, (R.), 1970. Rep. Progr. Phys., 33, 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoen, (R.) and Roberson, (C. H.), 1970. Amer. Min., 55, 43.Google Scholar
Wickersheim, (K. A.) and Korpi, (G. K.), 1965. Journ. Chem. Phys., 42, 579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar