Premium
Crystal structure of cobalt hydroxide carbonate Co 2 CO 3 (OH) 2 : density functional theory and X‐ray diffraction investigation
Author(s) -
González-López Jorge,
Cockcroft Jeremy K.,
Fernández-González Ángeles,
Jimenez Amalia,
Grau-Crespo Ricardo
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
acta crystallographica section b
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.604
H-Index - 33
ISSN - 2052-5206
DOI - 10.1107/s2052520617007983
Subject(s) - triclinic crystal system , monoclinic crystal system , orthorhombic crystal system , crystallography , powder diffraction , crystal structure , cobalt , density functional theory , materials science , chemistry , inorganic chemistry , computational chemistry
The cobalt carbonate hydroxide Co 2 CO 3 (OH) 2 is a technologically important solid which is used as a precursor for the synthesis of cobalt oxides in a wide range of applications. It also has relevance as a potential immobilizer of the toxic element cobalt in the natural environment, but its detailed crystal structure is so far unknown. The structure of Co 2 CO 3 (OH) 2 has now been investigated using density functional theory (DFT) simulations and powder X‐ray diffraction (PXRD) measurements on samples synthesized via deposition from aqueous solution. Two possible monoclinic phases are considered, with closely related but symmetrically different crystal structures, based on those of the minerals malachite [Cu 2 CO 3 (OH) 2 ] and rosasite [Cu 1.5 Zn 0.5 CO 3 (OH) 2 ], as well as an orthorhombic phase that can be seen as a common parent structure for the two monoclinic phases, and a triclinic phase with the structure of the mineral kolwezite [Cu 1.34 Co 0.66 CO 3 (OH) 2 ]. The DFT simulations predict that the rosasite‐like and malachite‐like phases are two different local minima of the potential energy landscape for Co 2 CO 3 (OH) 2 and are practically degenerate in energy, while the orthorhombic and triclinic structures are unstable and experience barrierless transformations to the malachite phase upon relaxation. The best fit to the PXRD data is obtained using a rosasite model [monoclinic with space group P 112 1 / n and cell parameters a = 3.1408 (4) Å, b = 12.2914 (17) Å, c = 9.3311 (16) Å and γ = 82.299 (16)°]. However, some features of the PXRD pattern are still not well accounted for by this refinement and the residual parameters are relatively poor. The relationship between the rosasite and malachite phases of Co 2 CO 3 (OH) 2 is discussed and it is shown that they can be seen as polytypes. Based on the similar calculated stabilities of these two polytypes, it is speculated that some level of stacking disorder could account for the poor fit of the PXRD data. The possibility that Co 2 CO 3 (OH) 2 could crystallize, under different growth conditions, as either rosasite or malachite, or even as a stacking‐disordered phase intermediate between the two, requires further investigation.