English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Pitfalls in the powder diffraction analysis of zeolites ZSM-5 and ZSM-8

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons59100

Weidenthaler,  C.
Research Group Weidenthaler, Max-Planck-Institut für Kohlenforschung, Max Planck Society;
Institut für Geowissenschaften der Universität Mainz, Saarstr. 21, D-55099 Mainz, Deutschland;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Weidenthaler, C., Fischer, R., & Shannon, R. (1994). Pitfalls in the powder diffraction analysis of zeolites ZSM-5 and ZSM-8. Powder Diffraction, 9(03), 205-212. doi:10.1017/S0885715600019242.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0024-220C-A
Abstract
Crystal structure analyses by the Rietveld method have shown that the framework structures of zeolites ZSM-5 and ZSM-8 are essentially identical. Therefore, it is difficult to distinguish the two phases especially when the template-free H forms are studied. In addition, some inconsistencies in publications on the two zeolites aggravate the correct interpretation of the powder diagrams. A powder pattern published for ZSM-8 which indicates significant differences between the lattice constants of ZSM-8 and ZSM-5 is shown to be incorrectly indexed. Correct reindexing gives lattice constants for ZSM-8 matching average ZSM-5 values. Peak splitting of a ZSM-8 reflection at 2θ≈23° (CuKα) has been used frequently to distinguish ZSM-8 from ZSM-5. However, it is also a common feature of ZSM-5 diagrams when the difference between a and b lattice constants is big enough to separate hkl and khl reflections within the instrumental resolution. Our data on two ZSM-8 samples indicate that cell dimensions of ZSM-8 do not deviate from average ZSM-5 values. It is suspected that effects in the decomposition of crystals upon calcination, and/or morphology and shape of twin individuals, and/or stacking faults account for different sorption properties of the two zeolites rather than differences in their average crystal structures.