Éó¸åÈ˵ÄÎÊÌ⣺
Page 7 Line 25-27: The comparison of the crystallite size of the materials in this study with Degussa P25 makes little sense here. The 9.7 nm size was merely ½ö½öestimated from XRD pattern. (If the Scherrer equation was used, it should be indicated in text. I actually do not think crystallite size calculated by Scherrer equation here is convincing enough, since it only provides a lower bound)There is no evidence that the 20-40 nm size of P25 was obtained with comparable approaches (I personally would assume that more direct evidence of the crystallite size of P25 would come from TEM).
ÎÒÔÚÎÄÖÐÊÇÕâôдµÄ£ºAccording to the X-ray diffraction date, the lattice parameters of KLaTi2O6 were found to be a=b=c=0.3897 nm. The crystallite size was 9.7 nm, which was far less than that of Degussa P25 TiO2 with an average crystallite size of 20-40 nm (Han et al., 2007).
Æäʵ¾§ÌåÁ£¾¶9.7ÊÇÔÚ×öXRDµÄʱºò£¬ÒÇÆ÷Ö±½Ó¸ø³öµÄcrystal sizeÖµ£¬ÒÇÆ÷ÊÇÕâôËãµÄ£º Williamson-Hall plot method £¨ÕâÖÖ·½·¨ÊÇÈÕ±¾Öêʽ»áÉçRigaku D/max 2500 X-ray diffraction analyzer Èí¼þËù²ÉÓõļÆËã·½·¨£©
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡.¹«Ê½.( 1)
Where L is the crystallite size, K is determained by the crystallite configuration, K=1. ¦Â is the spread attributable to lattice strain and crystallite size alone. is the wavelength of the X-ray radiation ( = 0.15418 nm) and ¦È is the Bragg diffraction angle. Plotting against based on these results makes it possible to obtain crystallite size L from the gradient of the approximation line and lattice strain e from the y-intercept.
ÄÇÎÒÔÚÎÄÖиÄÕýµÄʱºòÊǸðѹ«Ê½£¨1£©Ð´ÉÏ»¹ÊǸðÑscherrer equation дÉÏ£¿
![]()
¹«Ê½£¨1£©.jpg |