2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpcs.2009.12.060
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Synthesis and characterization of the SnO2-pillared layered titanate nanohybrid

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 15 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure shows the X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of the investigated samples that are all characteristics of the lepidocrocite-type cesium titanate ( Immm ). The 011 reflection (× in Figure ) typically overlaps with the 060 reflection in the □-containing sample Cs x TO ( x = 0.70 or 0.67), which is in agreement with the report by Grey et al Upon substitution of Zn for Ti in Cs 0.7 ZnTO, these two peaks are clearly separated; this finding is also consistent with the calculated XRD pattern reported by Gao et al Table lists the corresponding unit cell parameters, which agree reasonably with the reported values. ,,, (The differences might be due to small variations in stoichiometries from different laboratories.) Taking Cs 0.7 TO as an example, we used CellCalc to determine the following unit cell parameters: a = 3.815(4) Å, b = 17.46(2) Å, and c = 2.961(6) Å, with an interlayer spacing d 020 (= b /2) of ∼8.6 Å.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Figure shows the X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of the investigated samples that are all characteristics of the lepidocrocite-type cesium titanate ( Immm ). The 011 reflection (× in Figure ) typically overlaps with the 060 reflection in the □-containing sample Cs x TO ( x = 0.70 or 0.67), which is in agreement with the report by Grey et al Upon substitution of Zn for Ti in Cs 0.7 ZnTO, these two peaks are clearly separated; this finding is also consistent with the calculated XRD pattern reported by Gao et al Table lists the corresponding unit cell parameters, which agree reasonably with the reported values. ,,, (The differences might be due to small variations in stoichiometries from different laboratories.) Taking Cs 0.7 TO as an example, we used CellCalc to determine the following unit cell parameters: a = 3.815(4) Å, b = 17.46(2) Å, and c = 2.961(6) Å, with an interlayer spacing d 020 (= b /2) of ∼8.6 Å.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%