Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T05:40:36.825Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

X-ray studies of synthetic diamonds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

Kathleen Lonsdale ,
H. Judith Milledge  and
Eric Nave
Kathleen Lonsdale
Affiliation:
University College, London, W.C. 1
H. Judith Milledge
Affiliation:
University College, London, W.C. 1
Eric Nave
Affiliation:
University College, London, W.C. 1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Studies are described of various specimens of diamonds made by the General Electric Company of New York, and by Allmänna Svenska Elektriska Aktiebolaget, Västeras, Sweden. The G.E. synthetic diamonds always contain single crystal inclusions of nickel or of a Ni-rich face-centred cubic compound. These are strictly parallel to the diamond surrounding them. If the nickel inclusions are twinned on (111), the diamond is similarly twinned; and this is usually the case. It is suggested that epitaxial growth is part of the mechanism of the graphite-to-diamond transformation in the G.E. technique. Other powdered or single-crystal inclusions are also found; some of those correspond to compounds that occur in meteoritic carbon. There is no parallel growth in such cases. The Swedish synthetic diamonds do not contain nickel, but they are generally less well-crystallized than the G.E. specimens. Both, however, give good diffraction spots indicating a well-ordered structure with (except very rarely) no trace of graphite present.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 32 , Issue 246 , September 1959 , pp. 185 - 201
Copyright
Copyright © 1959, The Mineralogical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, (B.W.), 1958. Gemmologist, vol. 27, p. 59.Google Scholar
Bacon, (G.E.), 1950. Acta Cryst., vol. 3, p. 320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bannister, (F.A.) and Lonsdale, (K.), 1943. Min. Mag., vol. 26, p. 315.Google Scholar
Bernier, (R.), 1951. Ann. Chim., vol. 6, p. 104.Google Scholar
Bundy, (F.P.), Hall, (H.T.), Marshall, (A.L.), Nerad (n. J.), and Strong, (H.M.), 1955. Man-Made Diamonds. G.E. Research Information Services.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bundy, (F.P.), Strong, (H.M.), and Wentorf (R. H., Jnr.), 1955. Nature, vol. 186, p. 51.Google Scholar
Grenville-Wells, (H.J.), 1952. Min. Mag., vol. 29, p. 803.Google Scholar
Grenville-Wells, (H.J.), and Lonsdalr, (K.), 1958.. Nature, vol. 181, p. 758.Google Scholar
Grenville-Wells, (H.J.), 1958.. Symposium on Crystal Physics. Nat. Inst. Sci. India (in the press).Google Scholar
Hall, (H.T.), 1956. Article on pp. 161-166 of the Symposium: High Temperature- A Tool for the Future. Stanford Research Institute, California, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Hall, (H.T.), 1958. Science, vol. 128, p. 445.Google Scholar
Liander, (H.), 1955. Asea Journal, p. 97.Google Scholar
Lipson, (H.) and Stokes, (A.R.), 1942. Nature, vol 149, p. 328.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, (K.), 1942. Proc. Roy. Soc., ser. A, vol. 179, p. 315.Google Scholar
Nath, (N.), 1935. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., vol. 2, p. 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slawson, (C.B.), 1957. Amer. Min., vol. 42, p. 299.Google Scholar