Benito et al.
tion of urea in aqueous solution.9 Urea hydrolysis proceeds
in two steps: formation of ammonium cyanate (NH4CNO),
which is the rate-determining step, and subsequent hydrolysis
of NH4CNO to ammonium carbonate. Because of the low-
supersaturation conditions, the number of nuclei formed is
small, therefore leading to large, well-crystallized particles.10
The parameters affecting the properties of the materials, such
as phase purity and particle size, are the total concentration
of metal (M) cations, the M2+/(M2+ + M3+) molar fraction,
the urea/(M2+ + M3+) molar fraction in solution, and the
temperature,7,11–13 since altering some of these modifies the
extent of supersaturation as well. Among all of these
parameters, temperature seems to be the most important
one for yielding well-crystallized samples, since urea de-
composition is thermally activated and the decomposition
kinetics can be greatly enhanced by increasing the temperature.
Thermal activation of urea decomposition at ambient
pressure requires long reaction times. Several modifications
of this thermal decomposition procedure have been proposed.
For instance, use of hydrothermal conditions leads to faster
precipitation of the compounds than during thermal activation
at ambient pressure and reduces the time required to yield
the pure hydrotalcite phase.14,15 Another modification is the
use of microwave radiation as a heating source. In a previous
paper,16 we reported the synthesis of Mg-Al LDH com-
pounds using microwave-assisted urea hydrolysis, showing
that the formation of the LDH phase depends on the
temperature and irradiation time and that the microwave-
hydrothermal treatment reduces the time required for the
synthesis. Also, Jobba´gy and co-workers17 recently proposed
the synthesis of Ni-Cr samples by a similar method but
using higher temperatures.
materials were evaluated. For comparison purposes, the
conventional hydrothermal treatment was also applied.
2. Experimental Section
2.1. Preparation of the Solids. The solids were prepared by a
method modified from that proposed by Costantino and co-workers7
and similar to that previously reported.16 One liter of a 0.5 M
solution containing 0.333 mol of NiCl2 ·6H2O or ZnCl2 and 0.165
mol of AlCl3 ·6H2O was mixed with 1.65 mol of urea to give a
urea/(M2+ + M3+) ratio of 3.3 (smaller values of this ratio yielded
poorer results and incomplete precipitation), and the mixture was
stirred until the solids were totally dissolved. The solution was
heated at 100, 125, 150, or 175 °C for times ranging from 5 to 300
min, depending on the layer composition, in a Milestone ETHOS
PLUS microwave oven. The times required in order to reach the
desired temperatures were 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, and 10 min for 100, 125,
150, and 175 °C, respectively. The temperature during irradiation
was measured using a thermocouple introduced into the reference
vessel. The software dynamically controlled the temperature profile,
adjusting the delivered power at every moment. The feedback
mechanism optimized the effects of too-high temperatures and
pressures and at the same time prevented thermal runaways.
However, the formation of hot spots within the vessel as a result
of selective microwave absorption by some particles could not be
ruled out. For comparison purposes and in order to study the
exclusive effect of the microwave radiation during the treatment,
the samples were compared to another set prepared using conven-
tional hydrothermal treatment, which was carried out at autogenous
pressure in a Teflon-lined, stainless steel Phaxe 2000 bomb placed
in a static oven at 150 °C for 2, 3, 5, 12, or 24 h. A volume of 50
mL of solution per vessel was used in both the microwave and
conventional procedures. After the sample was cooled to room
temperature, the pH was measured, and then the precipitate was
centrifuged and washed with distilled water until chloride anions
and products of the urea decomposition were completely removed.
Finally, the solids were dried in an oven at 40 °C in air.
The solids prepared under microwave irradiation are named as
XAW-T-t, where X ) N or Z (for Ni or Zn, respectively), T
represents the heating temperature in degrees Celsius, and t refers
to the heating time in minutes. The samples produced under
conventional hydrothermal conditions are named as XAHT-150-t,
where t stands for the heating time in hours.
2.2. Characterization of the Solids. Chemical elemental analysis
for Ni and Al was accomplished via atomic absorption using a Mark
2 ELL-240 apparatus by the Servicio General de Ana´lisis Qu´ımico
Aplicado (University of Salamanca). CHN elemental analyses were
performed using a LECO CHNS-932 elemental analyzer by the
Servicio Interdepartamental de Investigacion (University Autonoma
of Madrid).
In this work, we studied the influence of the cations on
the microwave-assisted homogeneous precipitation using
urea. For this reason, we extended the method to the synthesis
of nickel- and zinc-containing LDHs in order to assess
whether the method can be validated for other systems. The
starting solutions containing the metallic salts and urea were
submitted to microwave-hydrothermal treatment at different
temperatures for increasing periods of time, and the struc-
tural, thermal, and textural properties of the synthesized
(6) Yao, K.; Taniguchi, M.; Nakata, M.; Takahashi, M.; Yamagishi, A.
Langmuir 1998, 14, 2410–2414.
(7) Costantino, U.; Marmottini, F.; Nocchetti, M.; Vivani, R. Eur. J. Inorg.
Chem. 1998, 1439–1446.
(8) Radha, A. V.; Vishnu Kamath, P.; Shivakumara, C. Acta Crystallogr.
2007, B63, 243–250.
Powder X-ray powder diffraction (PXRD) patterns were recorded
on a Siemens D-500 instrument using Cu KR radiation (λ ) 1.54050
Å) and equipped with Diffrac AT software. The crystalline phases
were identified by comparison with JCPDS files.18 Unit cell
parameters were obtained by refining the peak positions of the
PXRD pattern with a least-squares method using the CELREF unit-
cell refinement program,19 assuming a hexagonal unit cell and space
(9) Shaw, W. H. R.; Bordeaux, J. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1955, 77, 4729–
4733.
(10) Gordon, L.; Salutzky, M. L.; Willard H. H. In Precipitation from
Homogeneous Solution; Wiley: London, 1959.
(11) Ogawa, M.; Kaiho, H. Langmuir 2002, 18, 4240–4242.
(12) Oh, J.-M.; Hwang, S.-H.; Choy, J.-H. Solid State Ionics 2002, 151,
285–291.
(13) Okamoto, K.; Iyi, N.; Sasaki, T. Appl. Clay Sci. 2007, 35, 218.
(14) Mohan Rao, M.; Reddy, B. R.; Jayalakshimi, M.; Jaya, V. S.; Sridhar,
B. Mater. Res. Bull. 2005, 40, 347–359.
j
group R3m. Average sizes of crystallites were calculated using the
(15) Kloprogge, J. T.; Hickey, L.; Trujillano, R.; Holgado, M. J.; San
Roman, M. S.; Rives, V.; Martens, W. N.; Frost, R. L. Cryst. Growth
Des. 2006, 6, 1533–1536.
(18) Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards (JCPDS), Interna-
tional Center for Diffraction Data, Swarthmore, PA, 1977.
(19) Laugier, J.; Bochu, B. CELREF: Program for Cell Parameter
Refinement from the Powder Diffraction Diagram, version V3;
Laboratoire des Mate´riaux et du Ge´nie Physique: Grenoble, France,
2003.
(16) Benito, P.; Labajos, F. M.; Rives, V. Cryst. Growth Des. 2006, 6,
1961–1966.
(17) Jobba´gy, M.; Blesa, M. A.; Regazzoni, A. E. J. Colloid Interface Sci.
2007, 309, 72–77.
5454 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 47, No. 12, 2008