A TIME DEPENDENT STUDY FOR THE FORMATION OF ULTRASMALL Cs-AlMCM-41 HOLLOW NANOSPHERES

Authors

  • Abdullahi Haruna
  • Sani Sadiq
  • Kabo S. Kamaluddeen

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33003/fjs-2021-0501-575

Keywords:

ultrasmall, nanoparticle, mesoporous, aluminosilicate, surfactant

Abstract

Monitoring of the formation of ultrasmall Cs-AlMCM-41 nanospheres under hydrothermal condition has been performed. It showed that when the CTABr surfactant, silica and alumina were mixed, homogenization of raw materials was first taking place, where CTABr molecules first interacted with the inorganic species via self-assembly into helical rod-like micelles. Hydrolysis, condensation and polymerization of silica and alumina precursors were then initiated. In addition, the Cs+ cation also participated during the formation of MCM-41 structure where it counterbalanced the negative charge of the aluminosilicate surface. After 14 h, the aluminosilicate oligomers were produced and fully enclosed the spherical micelles. Further increasing the hydrothermal treatment to 24 h onwards, polycondensation silanol siloxane would take place leading to the emergence of well-defined and highly ordered MCM-41 structure. This study came up with a clear picture on the formation of Cs-AlMCM-41 hollow nanospheres in cationic-surfactant-templated. This suggested that similar studies for other mesoporous materials such as MCM-48 and MCM-50 under different conditions and approaches could also be explored

References

Chami, P.S. and Singh, B. and Thomas, D. A (2012) two-parameter ratio-product-ratio estimator using auxiliary information, ISRN probability and Statistics. Article ID 103860. doi:10.5402/2012/103860.

Chen, J. and Qin, J. (1993). Empirical likelihood estimation for finite populations and the effective usage of auxiliary information. Biometrika, 80:107–116.

Clement, E. P., Udofia, G.A. and Enang, E. I. (2014b). Sample design for domain calibration estimators. International Journal of Probability and Statistics, 3 (1), 8-14.

Deville, J.C. and Sarndal, C. E. (1992). Calibration estimators in survey sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87, 376-382.

Kim, J.M. Sungur, E.A. and Heo T.Y. (2007). Calibration approach estimators in stratified sampling.Statistics and Probability Letters, 77(1), 99-103.

Kott, P. S. (2006). Using calibration weighting to adjust for nonresponse and coverage errors. Survey Methodology, 32, 133- 142.

Koyuncu, N. and Kadilar, C. (2013). Calibration estimators using different measures in stratified random sampling. International Journal of Modern Engineering Research, 3 (1), 415-419.

Malik, S. & Singh, R. (2012): Some improved multivariate-ratio-type estimators using geometric and harmonic means in stratified random sampling. ISRN Probability and Statistics, Article ID 509186.

Rao, J. N. K. and Singh, A. C. (1997). A ridge shrinkage method for range restricted weight calibration in survey sampling. Proceedings of the section on survey research methods, American Statistical Association. 57–64.

Ray, S.K. and Singh, R.K. (1981) Difference-cum-ratio type estimators. J. Ind. Statist. Assoc., 19, 147-151.

Horn. S. and Yu, F. (1998). Estimation of variance of general regression estimator: Higher level calibration approach. Survey Methodology, 24, 41­50.

Subramani, J. and Kumarapandiyan, G. (2012). A Class of almost unbiased modified ratio estimators for population mean with known population parameters, Elixir Statistics 44, 7411-741.

Published

2021-06-28

How to Cite

Haruna, A., Sadiq, S., & Kamaluddeen, K. S. (2021). A TIME DEPENDENT STUDY FOR THE FORMATION OF ULTRASMALL Cs-AlMCM-41 HOLLOW NANOSPHERES. FUDMA JOURNAL OF SCIENCES, 5(1), 347 - 357. https://doi.org/10.33003/fjs-2021-0501-575