| Literature DB >> 32409641 |
Congxue Tian1,2.
Abstract
The structural factors such as crystal structure, particle size distribution and impurity content of hydrated TiO2 had great effects on the structures and pigment properties of the rutile TiO2. The rutile TiO2 white pigment was prepared via the Short Sulfate Process from low concentration industrial TiOSO4 solution. In order to produce rutile TiO2 pigment with good structures and excellent pigment properties, the crystal size of the hydrated TiO2 should be controlled less than 8.9 nm and as close as possible to 7.9 nm, which could effectively promote the phase transformation and crystal growth of the rutile TiO2. The appropriate particle size distribution of hydrated TiO2 had obvious effects on obtaining rutile TiO2 with narrower particle size distribution and near 0.20 µm. It was best to adjust the hydrolysis conditions to reduce the specific surface area of the hydrated TiO2 so as to reduce the iron ion impurity adsorption.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32409641 PMCID: PMC7224175 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-64976-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1XRD patterns for the hydrated TiO2.
Figure 2XRD patterns for the rutile TiO2 pigments.
Crystal size, rutile content and pigment properties for hydrated TiO2 and rutile TiO2 pigment.
| Hydrated TiO2 | L(101)(nm) | Rutile TiO2 | XR(%) | L(110)(nm) | TCS | SCX | Jasn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 8.42 | A1 | 98.5 | 124.2 | 1780 | 2.25 | 94.54 |
| B | 8.14 | B1 | 98.8 | 134.1 | 1820 | 2.56 | 94.86 |
| C | 7.83 | C1 | 99.1 | 142.4 | 1840 | 3.18 | 95.17 |
| D | 7.57 | D1 | 99.4 | 147.6 | 1810 | 2.64 | 94.93 |
| E | 7.10 | E1 | 99.9 | 158.3 | 1700 | 2.19 | 94.68 |
| R930 | / | R930 | / | / | 1910 | 3.12 | 94.52 |
Effect of particle size distribution and impurities content of hydrated TiO2 on rutile TiO2 pigment.
| Hydrated TiO2 | DAV nm | Pdi | SBET m2/g | Fe % | Rutile TiO2 | DAV nm | Pdi | Wt,% (0.15~0.30 µm) | Fe % | ZnO % | K2O + Na2O % | P2O5% | RS % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1130 | 0.433 | 275 | 0.0042 | A1 | 339 | 0.362 | 66.8 | 0.0040 | 0.2295 | 0.1522 | 0.1025 | 97.8 |
| B | 976 | 0.341 | 256 | 0.0022 | B1 | 307 | 0.265 | 71.4 | 0.0021 | 0.2283 | 0.1519 | 0.1021 | 98.4 |
| C | 782 | 0.132 | 243 | 0.0012 | C1 | 238 | 0.107 | 78.2 | 0.0011 | 0.2272 | 0.1526 | 0.1018 | 99.2 |
| D | 887 | 0.369 | 267 | 0.0034 | D1 | 321 | 0.303 | 69.7 | 0.0033 | 0.2279 | 0.1531 | 0.1020 | 97.9 |
| E | 1029 | 0.475 | 282 | 0.0052 | E1 | 372 | 0.387 | 64.1 | 0.0050 | 0.2284 | 0.1534 | 0.1022 | 97.1 |
| R930 | / | / | / | R930 | / | / | / | / | / | / | / | 100 |
Figure 3UV–vis diffuse reflection spectra for the rutile TiO2 pigments.
Figure 4SEM photographs for rutile TiO2 pigment.
Figure 5TEM photograph for sample C1.