Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 535

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Investigation of smectite hydration properties by modeling experimental X-ray diffraction patterns: Part I. Montmorillonite hydration properties

Ferrage, E.·2005·American Mineralogist

Abstract

Hydration of the <1 μm size fraction of SWy-1 source clay (low-charge montmorillonite) was studied by modeling of X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns recorded under controlled relative humidity (RH) conditions on Li-, Na-, K-, Mg-, Ca-, and Sr-saturated specimens. The quantitative description of smectite hydration, based on the relative proportions of different layer types derived from the fitting of experimental XRD patterns, was consistent with previous reports of smectite hydration. However, the coexistence of smectite layer types exhibiting contrasting hydration states was systematically observed, and heterogeneity rather than homogeneity seems to be the rule for smectite hydration. This heterogeneity can be characterized qualitatively using the standard deviation of the departure from rationality of the 00l reflection series (ξ), which is systematically larger than 0.4 Å when the prevailing layer type accounts for ~70% or less of the total layers (~25% of XRD patterns examined). In addition, hydration heterogeneities are not distributed randomly within smectite crystallites, and models describing these complex structures involve two distinct contributions, each containing different layer types that are interstratifed randomly. As a result, the different layer types are partially segregated in the sample. However, these two contributions do not imply the actual presence of two populations of particles in the sample. XRD profile modeling also has allowed the refinement of structural parameters, such as the location of interlayer species and the layer thickness corresponding to the different layer types, for all interlayer cations and RH values. From the observed dependence of the latter parameter on the cation ionic potential (v/r; v = cation valency and r = ionic radius) and on RH, the following equations were derived: Layer thickness (1W) = 12.556 + 0.3525 × (v/r . 0.241) × (v × RH . 0.979) Layer thickness (2W) = 15.592 + 0.6472 × (v/r . 0.839) × (v × RH . 1.412) which allow the quantification of the increase of layer thickness with increasing RH for both 1W (one water) and 2W (two water) layers. In addition, for 2W layers, interlayer H 2 O molecules are probably distributed as a unique plane on each side of the central interlayer cation. This plane of H 2 O molecules is located at ~1.20 Å from the central interlayer cation along the c* axis

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2138/am.2005.1776

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 535

Metadata

Authors
Ferrage, E.
Venue
American Mineralogist
Published
2005-08-01
Volume
90
Issue
8-9
Pages
1358-1374
ISSN
0003-004X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025878233
Cited by
535
References
1
FWCI
5.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Investigation of smectite hydration properties by modeling experimental X-ray diffraction patterns: Part I. Montmorillonite hydration properties. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2138/am.2005.1776
The paper
Ferrage, E. (2005). Investigation of smectite hydration properties by modeling experimental X-ray diffraction patterns: Part I. Montmorillonite hydration properties. American Mineralogist. https://doi.org/10.2138/am.2005.1776

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.