Differences between adsorption properties of two Rhodesian chrysotile samples. Relation with the DTA features introduced by leaching and grinding | Zendy

H. Suquet | Zendy

Open Access

Differences between adsorption properties of two Rhodesian chrysotile samples. Relation with the DTA features introduced by leaching and grinding

Author(s) -

H. Suquet

Publication year - 1989

Publication title -

canadian journal of chemistry

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 0.323

H-Index - 68

eISSN - 1480-3291

pISSN - 0008-4042

DOI - 10.1139/v89-034

Subject(s) - chrysotile , chemistry , leaching (pedology) , phenanthrene , grinding , adsorption , amorphous solid , inorganic chemistry , chemical engineering , environmental chemistry , metallurgy , organic chemistry , materials science , asbestos , geology , soil science , soil water , engineering

Substantial differences are founded between the absorption properties of two Rhodesian chrysotile samples (−1 and −2), which are, in most chemical and structural aspects, highly similar. The phenanthrene and CO 2 amounts adsorbed are much less important on chrysotile-2 than on chrysotile-1. This indicates that chrysotile-2 has fewer basic surface sites. DTA and XRD results show that dry grinding and leaching produce a breakdown of the chrysotile structure, yield amorphous silica, and lower the temperature of the dehydroxylation peak. The dehydroxylation peaks of chrysotile-1 and -2 are really doublets. As the low-temperature component of the dehydroxylation peak is greater in chrysotile-2 than in chrysotile-1, the chrysotile-2 contains more ground and (or) leached fibers than chrysotile-1 and consequently shows weaker absorption properties. Keywords: chrysotile, leaching, phenanthrene adsorption.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research