NOTES on the STRUCTURE of DELAFOSSITE A. Pansr, Lr Niter
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NOTES ON THE STRUCTURE OF DELAFOSSITE A. Pansr, Lrniter sity of Calif ornia, B erkeley,C alif ornia. Arsrnect From a consideration of interionic radii and coordination it is shown that delafossite, CuFeOs, is probably to be considered cuprous metaferrite. That is, the copper is present as cuprous ions and the iron as ferric ions. Eight years ago I reported to the societyl on a comparison of spacing measurementsderived from powder patterns of delafossitewith spacings calculated for the structure of artificial CuFeOz which had been briefly described by Soller and Thompson. It was concluded that delafossite probably has the same structure as SoIIerand Thompson's artificial mate- rial.2 The density calculated from this structure, 5.52 (using the samevalue of Avogadro's numbdr used by Siegbahri,since it is assumedthat Soller and Thompson used Siegbahn wave-lengths), greatly exceedsthe value 5.07, then current in the literature, or the highest values I had then been able to obtain from the material used. A few years ago the late Dr. Ber- man reported to me that the value 5.41 had been obtained on an 8 mg. crystalline sample and thisvalue is now incorporated in the seventh edi- tion of Dana's SystemoJ Mi,neralogyand credited to Frondel. Table 1 shows the spacing measurementsand intensity observations on powder patterns of delafossite from various sourcescompared with theoretical spacingscorresponding to the lattice of Soller and Thompson. The discrepanciesbetween the several sets of spacings, especially be- tween the records taken from other publications and those obtained during this work, give an indication of the sort of departures that are often met in r-ray identification work. These are probably not due to variations in the delafossite.The smaller difierencesare"near the limits of accuracy of measurement,or may be due to differences,inthe manner of handling the data, but the absence of any line near 1.253 and the presenceof a line at 1.080 reported by Harcourt are strmewhat disturb- ing. It seems unjustified to attribute the 1.080 line to contamination when there is no suggestionof other such lines in the range of the larger spacings where they would be more likely. It seemsprobable that Har- courtts report on a delafossitepattern leaves something to be desired in the way of careful observation and reporting. I Crystal structure and density of delafossite (abstract only), Am. Minera.l.r23rl75.176 (1e38). 'It had earlierbeen assumed by Ramdohr(Zentralbl. J. Mineral,.,Ar289-303 (1937)) that suchis the case. 539 540 A, PABST T,lsln 1. INrnnpr-.qNll Specwcs ol Dtrnrossrrr Observed spacings and intensities Calcu- ated Bisbee Kimberley Bisbee spacingst Waldo* Pabst# Pabstl Harcourt** hkrt h,k,l, d dI dI d I d, I 0006 222 2.85 2.87 .45 2.85 .40 2.84 m 2.U 1.0 0rI2 110 2.49 2.52 t.20 2.51 1.15 2.49 s 2.5t s.0 10T4 2tl 2.235 2.246 .s0 2.230 .4s 2.22 m 2.23 1.0 01T8 332 1.656 1.670 .45 r.666 .40 1.650 m 1.66 1.0 tt20 107 t.512 1.516 .35 r.511 .35 1.507 m 1.515 1.0 10r.10 433 1.432\ t.436 .35 1.436 .35 m 0.5 000.12 444 1.4241 1126 32r 1.3371 1.349 .25 1.339 .25 m 01I.11 443 r.337J 2022 200 1.296 1.293 t.295 .15 1.289 1.2950.s 0224 220 1.253 1.251 t.253 .05 t.247 w 2028 ian t.tl7 r.lt6 1.118 .10 1.113 1.0800.2 022.t0 442 1.039\ 1.040 1.039 1.036 w rtz.t2 543 r.037J 1232 2rT .985 .983 .988 vw 2134 310 .966 .962 ew .949 ew 1238 43t .899 .898 .898 vw 3030 2II .873 .853 vw .813 ew .804 vw t For a cell of dimensions a,:5.96, a:29"26'; an:3.03, cn:17'09. I Mo radiation. fntensities recorded in heights of peaks on photometer curves in centi- meters. Difiraction patterns obtained through the courtesy of Mr. W. H. Dore, Division of Plant Nutrition, University of California. * A. W. Waldo, Identification of the copper ore minerals by means oI x-ray diffraction patterns: Am. Mi.nera!.,2Or 575-597 (1935). Radiation not indicated, s-strong, m-me- dium, w-weak, vw-very weak, ex'-exceptionally weak. +* G. A. Harcourt, Tables for the identification oI ore minerals by x-ray powder pat- terns: Am. Mineral,. 27r 63-113 (1942), Radiation not indicated. The technique of r-ray identification of crystalline materials, after many years of slow growth has been making more rapid progress in recent years. Unfortunately such failings as that just indicated are likely to be a hindrance. More crystallographic indexing of films and more checks against the literature of crystal structure wherever possible by those who use and especially by those who publish powder data for identification purposesseem to be called for. There are, of course, many caseswhere such indexing or checking is not feasible, but it has often STRUCTURE OF DELAFOSSITE 541 been omitted for no better reasonthan that the authors found it too tedi- ous. Delafossite was first reported from America by ProfessorRogers when he describedcrystals from Bisbee in 1913.3At that time ProfessorRogers considered the chemical constitution of the mineral and tried to deter- mine the valence of the copper and iron. After several chemical experi- ments which were not fully decisive it was concluded that "delafossite is probably cuprousmetaferrite, Cu'Fe"'02." Various methods not available thirty years ago might now be used to discriminate between Cu"Fe"O2 and Cu'Fe"'Oz. The method most appropriate to the present case depends on determination of interionic distancesin the crystal lattice. Tlinrn 2. Suuulnv ol INrnNsrtvCelcurlrrors lon Drr,lrossrrE wrrrr Cu nr 0. 0. 0 Feru eroo t" ossnwartoNs |, *, * ",?;;T?"rih?fl"_*rENsrry Calculated Observed+ Bis- Kim- r/r0 o.23 7/r8 bee berley hkit h,h,l, 0003 111 9 2451 0006 222 161 l.t 174 32 r42 150 174 .40 1011 100 36 40510 at12 110 510 t9 529 29 558 264 529 1.15 1014 2tl 187 9 196 lt 213 505 t96 .45 01T5 22r 8 7 9t224 0009 333 7 7 562 10T7 322 L 2 030 0118 332 t92 193 l_"160 176 193 >l^142 rL20 107 156 l>lrlttt56 156 156 rt23 2t0 1 0 0 10T.10 433 116\ 27 zl\ 138 159 .35 .35 000.12 4M 221 32 lllros tt26 32r 108f g2' q6l':>e7 .25 .25 109 96 01I.11 M3 r) 4 IJ 022r 117 2 + 1 2022 200 58 65 45 - lJ .15 0224 220 36 .10 .05 I Calculatedwith ionic/q values.AII other intensitiescalculatedwithatomic/ovalues. Seetext. * Observedintensities measuredby heights of peaks on photometric curve in centi- meters. 3 Delafossite,a cuprousmetaferrite from Bisbee,Arizona: Am. fow. Sci.,35, 290-294 (1e13). 542 A, PABST Before proceeding with this it seemed best to check the observed intensities of delafossite powder patterns against intensities calculated from the structure. Table 2 gives all pertinent data. It is seen that the observed intensities of lines on two patterns agree well with the intensi- ties corresponding to the structure given by Soller and Thompsona with one CuFeOr in a rhombohedral cell (4,:5.96, a:29o26'; an:3.A3, cn :17.O9) Cu in 0, 0, 0 Fe in l/2, l/2, I/2and O in I/9, I/9, 1/9 andS/9, 8/9,8/9. It is to be noted, however, that the lines observedall have h+k+I:2n. The intensities of these lines would be the same if any parameters are altered by l/2, t/2, I/2. Hence there is no difference in the intensity of theselines for O inl/9 (8/9) etc. i.e.,2f 18 (16/t8) etc., or in 11/18 (7/18) etc. The intensitiesof linesfor which hik*l*2n are afiected by such a parameter change, but no such lines are observed in powder patterns. Most of the intensity calculations recorded in Table 2 have been made rvith/0 values for the neutral atoms as given in the Internotional Tables Jor the Deterrni.nationof Crystal,Structures, vol. If, pp. 571 and 572. It may seem that it would have been better to use the scattering factors for the appropriate ions, especially since one of the objects of this work is to check on the valence state of the metals in the structure. Unfortu- nately tables are Iacking for copper or iron ionic scattering factors. The difierencein calculated intensities would be slight except for the first line or two, since the scattering power of O and O-2, which difier by 25/6 at zero scattering angle, differ by only 4.7/s at the angle lor 222 of dela- fossite and even lessfor other lines. For iron and copper the proportional difference in the scattering factors would be much less. Nevertheless, a calculation with improvised ionic scattering factors for Cu+l and Fe+3 and the accepted values for O-2 has been made for the first ten lines to show that no discrimination as to valence state of the ions is possible on this basis. Comparing the calculated intensities in the first three columns of Table 2 one can conclude that the efiect on the intensities of diffracted beams due to change of internuclear distances attending va- lence change outweighs the efiect due to change in scattering power.