Everything about Diamond Simulant totally explained
» This article addresses the many imitations of diamond. For a broader discussion of diamonds, see diamond. For other uses of the word diamond, see diamond (disambiguation).
The high price of
gem-grade
diamonds has created a large demand for materials with similar
gemological characteristics, known as
diamond simulants or
imitations. Simulants are distinct from
synthetic diamond, which unlike simulants is actual diamond, and therefore has the same
material properties as natural diamond.
Enhanced diamonds are also excluded from this definition. A diamond simulant may be artificial, natural, or in some cases a combination thereof. While their material properties depart markedly from those of diamond, simulants have certain desired characteristics—such as
dispersion and
hardness—which lend themselves to imitation. Trained gemologists with appropriate equipment are able to distinguish natural and synthetic diamonds from all diamond simulants, primarily by visual inspection.
The most common diamond simulants are high-
leaded glass (for example,
rhinestones) and
cubic zirconia (CZ), both artificial materials. A number of other artificial materials, such as
strontium titanate and synthetic
rutile have been developed since the mid
1950s, but these are no longer in common use. Introduced at the end of the
20th century, the lab grown product
moissanite has gained popularity as an alternative to diamond.
Desired and differential properties
In order to be considered for use as a diamond simulant, a material must possess certain diamond-like properties. The most advanced artificial simulants have properties which closely approach diamond, but all simulants have one or more features that clearly and (for those familiar with diamond) easily differentiate them from diamond. To a
gemologist, the most important of differential properties are those that foster non-destructive testing, and most of these are visual in nature. Non-destructive testing is preferred because most suspected diamonds are already cut into gemstones and set in
jewelry, and if a destructive test (which mostly relies on the relative fragility and softness of non-diamonds) fails it may damage the simulant—this isn't an acceptable outcome for most jewelry owners, as even if a stone isn't a diamond it may still be of value.
Following are some of the properties by which diamond and its simulants can be compared and contrasted.
Durability and density
The
Mohs scale of mineral hardness is a non-linear scale of common
minerals' resistances to scratching. Diamond is at the top of this scale (hardness 10) as it's the
hardest naturally occurring material known (the hardest substance known today is the man-made substance
aggregated diamond nanorods). Since diamonds are unlikely to encounter substances that can scratch it, other than another diamond, diamond gemstones are typically free of scratches. Diamond's hardness also is visually evident (under the
microscope or
loupe) by its highly
lustrous facets (described as
adamantine) which are perfectly flat, and its crisp, sharp facet edges. For a diamond simulant to be effective, it must be very hard relative to most gems. Most simulants fall far short of diamond's hardness, so they can be separated from diamond by their external flaws and poor polish.
In the recent past, the so-called "window pane test" was commonly thought to be an assured method of identifying diamond. It is a potentially destructive test wherein a suspect diamond gemstone is scraped against a pane of glass, with a positive result being a scratch on the glass and none on the gemstone. The use of
hardness points and
scratch plates made of
corundum (hardness 9) are also used in place of glass. Hardness tests are inadvisable for three reasons: glass is fairly soft (typically 6 or below) and can be scratched by a large number of materials (including many simulants); diamond has four directions of perfect and easy
cleavage (planes of structural weakness along which the diamond could split) which could be triggered by the testing process; and many diamond-like gemstones (including older simulants) are valuable in their own right.
The
specific gravity (SG) or density of a gem diamond is fairly constant at 3.52. Most simulants are far above or slightly below this value, which can make them easy to identify if unset. High-density liquids such as
diiodomethane can be used for this purpose, but they're all highly
toxic so are usually avoided. A more practical method is to compare the expected size and weight of a suspect diamond to its measured parameters: for example, a
cubic zirconia (SG 5.6–6) will be 1.7 times the expected weight of an equivalently sized diamond.
Optics and color
Diamonds are usually cut into
brilliants to bring out their
brilliance, the amount of light reflected back to the viewer, and
fire, the degree of colorful
prismatic flashes seen. Both properties are strongly affected by the cut of the stone, but they're a function of diamond's high
refractive index (RI; the degree to which incident light is bent upon entering the stone) of 2.417 (as measured by
sodium light, 589.3 nm) and high
dispersion (the degree to which white light is split into its
spectral colors within the stone) of 0.044, as measured by the sodium B and G line interval. Thus, if a diamond simulant's RI and dispersion are too low it'll appear comparatively dull or "lifeless"; if the RI and dispersion are too high, the effect will be considered unreal or even tacky. Very few simulants have closely approximating RI and dispersion, but even the close simulants can be separated by an experienced observer. Direct measurements of RI and dispersion are impractical (a standard gemological
refractometer has an upper limit of about RI 1.81), but several companies have devised
reflectivity meters to gauge a material's RI indirectly by measuring how well it reflects an
infrared beam.
Perhaps equally as important is
optic character. Diamond and other
cubic (and also
amorphous) materials are
isotropic, meaning light entering a stone behaves the same way regardless of direction. Conversely, most minerals are
anisotropic which produces
birefringence or double refraction of light entering the material in all directions other than an
optic axis (a direction of single refraction in a doubly refractive material). Under low magnification, this birefringence is usually detectable as a visual doubling of a cut gemstone's rear facets or internal flaws. An effective diamond simulant should therefore be isotropic.
Under longwave (365 nm)
ultraviolet light, diamond may
fluoresce a blue, yellow, green, mauve, or red of varying intensity. The most common fluorescence is blue, and such stones may also
phosphoresce yellow—this is thought to be a unique combination among gemstones. There is usually little if any response to shortwave ultraviolet, in contrast to many diamond simulants. Similarly, because most diamond simulants are artificial they tend to have uniform properties: in a multi-stone diamond ring, one would expect the individual diamonds to fluoresce differently (in different colors and intensities, with some likely to be inert). If all the stones fluoresce in an identical manner, they're unlikely to be diamond.
Most "colorless" diamonds are actually tinted yellow or brown to some degree, whereas artificial simulants are usually completely colorless—the equivalent of a perfect "D" in
diamond color terminology. This "too good to be true" factor is important to consider; colored diamond simulants meant to imitate fancy diamonds are more difficult to spot in this regard, but the simulants' colors rarely approximate. In most diamonds (even colorless ones) a characteristic
absorption spectrum can be seen (via a direct-vision
spectroscope), consisting of a fine line at 415 nm. The
dopants used to impart color in artificial simulants may be detectable as a complex
rare earth absorption spectrum, which is never seen in diamond.
Also present in most diamonds are certain internal and external flaws or
inclusions, the most common of which are fractures and solid foreign crystals. Artificial simulants are usually internally flawless, and any flaws that are present are characteristic of the manufacturing process. The inclusions seen in natural simulants will often be unlike those ever seen in diamond, most notably
liquid "feather" inclusions. The
diamond cutting process will often leave portions of the original crystal's surface intact. These are termed
naturals and are usually on the girdle of the stone; they take the form of triangular, rectangular, or square pits (
etch marks) and are seen only in diamond.
Thermal and electrical
Diamond is an extremely effective
thermal conductor and usually an
electrical insulator. The former property is widely exploited in the use of an electronic
thermal probe to separate diamonds from their imitations. These probes consist of a pair of battery-powered
thermistors mounted in a fine
copper tip. One thermistor functions as a
heating device while the other measures the temperature of the copper tip: if the stone being tested is a diamond, it'll conduct the tip's thermal energy rapidly enough to produce a measurable temperature drop. As most simulants are thermal insulators, the thermistor's heat won't be conducted. This test takes about 2–3 seconds. The only possible exception is
moissanite, which has a thermal conductivity similar to diamond: older probes can be fooled by moissanite, but newer testers are sophisticated enough to differentiate the two materials.
A diamond's electrical conductance is only relevant to blue or gray-blue stones, because the interstitial
boron responsible for their color also makes them
semiconductors. Thus a suspected blue diamond can be affirmed if it completes an
electric circuit successfully.
Artificial simulants
Diamond has been imitated by artificial materials for hundreds of years: advances in technology have seen the development of increasingly better simulants with properties ever nearer those of diamond. Although most of these simulants were characteristic of a certain time period, their large production volumes ensured that all continue to be encountered with varying frequency in jewelry of the present. Nearly all were first conceived for intended use in
high technology, such as
lasing mediums,
varistors, and
bubble memory. Due to their limited present supply, collectors may pay a premium for the older types.
Summary table
Diamond simulants and their gemological properties>
| Material |
Formula |
Refractive index(es) 589.3 nm |
Dispersion 431 - 687 nm |
Hardness (Mohs' scale) |
Density (g/cm3) |
Thermal Cond. |
State of the art |
| Diamond | C |
2.417 |
0.044 |
10 |
3.52 |
Excellent |
1476 –
|
Artificial Simulants:
|
| Glasses | Silica with Pb, Al, &/or Tl |
~ 1.6 |
> 0.020 |
< 6 |
2.4 – 4.2 |
Poor |
1700 –
|
| White Sapphire | Al2O3 |
1.762 – 1.770 |
0.018 |
9 |
3.97 |
Poor |
1900 – 1947
|
| Spinel | MgO·Al2O3 |
1.727 |
0.020 |
8 |
~ 3.6 |
Poor |
1920 – 1947
|
| Rutile | TiO2 |
2.62 – 2.9 |
0.33 |
~ 6 |
4.25 |
Poor |
1947 – 1955
|
| Strontium titanate | SrTiO3 |
2.41 |
0.19 |
5.5 |
5.13 |
Poor |
1955 – 1970
|
| YAG | Y3Al5O12 |
1.83 |
0.028 |
8.25 |
4.55 – 4.65 |
Poor |
1970 – 1975
|
| GGG | Gd3Ga5O12 |
1.97 |
0.045 |
7 |
7.02 |
Poor |
1973 – 1975
|
| Cubic Zirconia | ZrO2(+ rare earths) |
~ 2.2 |
~ 0.06 |
~ 8.3 |
~ 5.7 |
Poor |
1976 –
|
| Moissanite | SiC |
2.648 – 2.691 |
0.104 |
8.5-9.25 |
3.2 |
High |
1998 –
|
The "refractive index(es)" column shows one refractive index for singly refractive substances, and a range for doubly refractive substances.
1700 onwards
The formulation of
glasses using
lead,
alumina, and
thallium to increase RI and dispersion began in the late
Baroque period. These glasses are fashioned into
brilliants, and when freshly cut they can be surprisingly effective diamond simulants. Known as rhinestones, pastes, or strass, glass simulants are a common feature of
antique jewelry, and in such cases rhinestones can be valuable historical artifacts in their own right. The great softness (below hardnes 6) imparted by the lead means a rhinestone's facet edges and faces will quickly become rounded and scratched. Together with
conchoidal fractures, and air bubbles or flow lines within the stone, these features make glass imitations easy to spot under only moderate magnification. In contemporary production it's more common for glass to be molded rather than cut into shape: in these stones the facets will be concave and facet edges rounded, and mold marks or seams may also be present. Glass has also been combined with other materials to produce
composites.
1900–1947
The first
crystalline artificial diamond simulants were synthetic white
sapphire (
Al2O
3, pure
corundum) and
spinel (MgO·Al
2O
3, pure
magnesium aluminium
oxide). Both have been synthesized in large quantities since the first decade of the
20th century via the
Verneuil or flame-fusion process, although spinel wasn't in wide use until the
1920s. The Verneuil process involves an inverted
oxyhydrogen blowpipe, with purified feed powder mixed with
oxygen that's carefully fed through the blowpipe. The feed powder falls through the oxy-hydrogen flame, melts, and lands on a rotating and slowly descending pedestal below. The height of the pedestal is constantly adjusted to keep its top at the optimal position below the flame, and over a number of hours the molten powder cools and crystallizes to form a single pedunculated pear or
boule crystal. The process is an economical one, with crystals of up to 9 centimeters (3.5 inches) in diameter grown. Boules grown via the modern
Czochralski process may weigh several kilograms.
Synthetic sapphire and spinel are durable materials (hardness 9 and 8) that take a good polish, but due to their much lower RI when compared to diamond (1.762–1.770 for sapphire, 1.727 for spinel) they're "lifeless" when cut. (Synthetic sapphire is also anisotropic, making it even easier to spot.) Their low RIs also mean a much lower dispersion (0.018 and 0.020), so even when cut into brilliants they lack the
fire of diamond. Nevertheless synthetic spinel and sapphire were popular diamond simulants from the 1920s up until the late 1940s, when newer and better simulants began to appear. Both have also been combined with other materials to create composites. Commercial names once used for synthetic sapphire include Diamondette, Diamondite, Jourado Diamond', and
Thrilliant. Names for synthetic spinel included
Corundolite,
Lustergem,
Magalux, and
Radient.
1947–1970
The first of the optically "improved" simulants was synthetic
rutile (TiO
2, pure
titanium oxide). Introduced in
1947–
48, synthetic rutile possesses plenty of life when cut—perhaps too much life for a diamond simulant. Synthetic rutile's RI and dispersion (2.8 and 0.33) are so much higher than diamond that the resultant brilliants look almost
opal-like in their display of prismatic colors. Synthetic rutile is also doubly refractive: although some stones are cut with the table perpendicular to the optic axis to hide this property, merely tilting the stone will reveal the doubled back facets.
The continued success of synthetic rutile was also hampered by the material's inescapable yellow tint, which producers were never able to remedy. However, synthetic rutile in a range of different colors, including blues and reds, were produced using various metal oxide
dopants. These and the near-white stones were extremely popular if unreal stones. Synthetic rutile is also fairly soft (hardness ~6) and brittle, and therefore wears poorly. It is synthesized via a modification of the Verneuil process, which uses a third oxygen pipe to create a
tricone burner—this is necessary to produce a single crystal, due to the much higher oxygen losses involved in the oxidation of titanium. The technique was invented by Charles H. Moore, Jr. at the
South Amboy,
New Jersey-based National Lead Company (later N. L. Industries). National Lead and
Union Carbide were the primary producers of synthetic rutile, and peak annual production reached 750,000 carats (150 kg). Some of the many commercial names applied to synthetic rutile include:
Astryl,
Diamothyst,
Gava or
Java Gem,
Meredith,
Miridis,
Rainbow Diamond,
Rainbow Magic Diamond,
Rutania,
Titangem,
Titania, and
Ultamite.
National Lead was also where research into the synthesis of another titanium compound,
strontium titanate (
SrTiO
3, pure tausonite), was conducted. Research was done during the late 1940s and early
1950s by Leon Merker and Langtry E. Lynd, who also used a tricone modification of the Verneuil process. Upon its commercial introduction in
1955, strontium titanate quickly replaced synthetic rutile as the most popular diamond simulant. This was due not only to strontium titanate's novelty, but to its superior optics: its RI (2.41) is very close to that of diamond, while its dispersion (0.19), although also very high, was a significant improvement over synthetic rutile's psychedelic display. Perhaps most importantly was the complete lack of yellow tint that so plagued synthetic rutile. Dopants were also used to give synthetic titanate a variety of colors, including yellow, orange to red, blue, and black. The material is also
isotropic like diamond, meaning there's no distracting doubling of facets as seen in synthetic rutile.
Strontium titanate's only major drawback (if one excludes excess fire) is fragility. It is both softer (hardness 5.5) and more brittle than synthetic rutile—for this reason, strontium titanate was also combined with more durable materials to create
composites. It was otherwise the best simulant around at the time, and at its peak annual production was 1.5 million carats (300 kg). Due to
patent coverage all
US production was by National Lead, while large amounts were produced overseas by
Nakazumi Company of
Japan. Commercial names for strontium titanate included
Brilliante,
Diagem,
Diamontina,
Fabulite, and
Marvelite.
1970–1976
From about
1970 strontium titanate began to be replaced by a new class of diamond imitations: the "synthetic
garnets." These are not true garnets in the usual sense because they're
oxides rather than
silicates, but they do share natural garnet's
crystal structure (both are cubic and therefore isotropic) and the general formula A
3B
2C
3O
12. While in natural garnets C is always
silicon and A and B may be one of several common
elements, most synthetic garnets are composed of uncommon
rare earth elements. They are the only diamond simulants (aside from rhinestones) with no known natural counterparts: gemologically they're best termed
artificial rather than
synthetic, because the latter term is reserved for human-made materials that can also be found in nature.
Although a number of artificial garnets were successfully grown, only two became important as diamond simulants. The first was
yttrium aluminium garnet (
YAG; Y
3Al
5O
12) in the late
1960s. It was (and still is) produced via the Czochralski or crystal-pulling process, which involves growth from the melt. An
iridium crucible surrounded by an
inert atmosphere is used, wherein
yttrium oxide and
aluminium oxide are melted and mixed together at a carefully controlled temperature of ca. 1980°C. A small seed crystal is attached to a rod which is lowered over the crucible until the crystal contacts the surface of the melted mixture. The seed crystal acts as a site of
nucleation; the temperature is kept steady at a point where the surface of the mixture is just below the melting point. The rod is slowly and continuously rotated and retracted, and the pulled mixture crystallizes as it exits the crucible, forming a single crystal in the form of a cylindrical boule. The crystal's purity is extremely high, and it typically measures 5 cm (2 inches) in diameter and 20 cm (8 inches) long, and weighs 9,000 carats (1.75 kg).
YAG's hardness (8.25) and lack of brittleness were great improvements over strontium titanate, and although its RI (1.83) and dispersion (0.028) were fairly low, they were enough to give brilliant-cut YAGs perceptible fire and good brilliance (although still much lower than diamond). A number of different colors were also produced with the addition of dopants, including yellow, red, and a vivid green which was used to imitate
emerald. Major producers included
ICT, INC. of Michigan,
Litton Systems,
Allied Chemical,
Raytheon, and
Union Carbide; annual global production peaked at 40 million carats (8,000 kg) in
1972, but fell sharply thereafter. Commercial names for YAG included
Diamonair,
Diamonique,
Gemonair,
Replique, and
Triamond.
While market saturation was one reason for the fall in YAG production levels, another was the recent introduction of the other artificial garnet important as a diamond simulant,
gadolinium gallium garnet (GGG; Gd
3Ga
5O
12). Produced in much the same manner as YAG (but with a lower melting point of 1750°C), GGG had an RI (1.97) close to, and a dispersion (0.045) nearly identical to diamond. GGG was also hard enough (hardness 7) and tough enough to be an effective gemstone, but its ingredients were also much more expensive than YAG's. Equally hindering was GGG's tendency to turn a dark brown upon exposure to
sunlight or other
ultraviolet source: this was due to the fact that most GGG gems were fashioned from impure material that was rejected for technological use. The SG of GGG (7.02) is also the highest of all diamond simulants and amongst the highest of all gemstones, which makes loose GGG gems easy to spot by comparing their dimensions with their expected and actual weights. Relative to its predecessors, GGG was never produced in significant quantities; it became more or less unheard of by the close of the 1970s. Commercial names for GGG included
Diamonique II and
Galliant.
1976 to present
Cubic zirconia or CZ (ZrO
2;
zirconium oxide—not to be confused with
zircon, a zirconium silicate) quickly dominated the diamond simulant market following its introduction in
1976, and it remains the most gemologically and economically important simulant. CZ had been synthesized since
1930 but only in
ceramic form: the growth of single-crystal CZ would require an approach radically different from those used for previous simulants due to zirconium's extremely high melting point (2750°C), unsustainable by any
crucible. The solution found involved a network of water-filled copper pipes and
radio frequency induction coils; the latter to heat the zirconium feed powder, and the former to cool the exterior and maintain a retaining "skin" under 1 millimeter thick. CZ was thus grown in a crucible of itself, a technique called
cold crucible (in reference to the cooling pipes) or
skull crucible (in reference to either the shape of the crucible or of the crystals grown).
At
standard pressure zirconium oxide would normally crystallize in the
monoclinic rather than cubic crystal system: for cubic crystals to grow, a stabilizer must be used. This is usually
yttrium or
calcium. The skull crucible technique was first developed in
1960s France, but it was perfected in the early 1970s by
Soviet scientists under V. V. Osiko at the
Lebedev Physical Institute in
Moscow. By
1980 annual global production had reached 50 million carats (10,000 kg).
The hardness (8–8.5), RI (2.15–2.18, isotropic), dispersion (0.058–0.066), and low material cost make CZ the best and most popular simulant of diamond. Its optical and physical constants are however variable, owing to the different stabilizers used by different producers. It is important to realize that CZ isn't a compound. There are many formulations of stabilized cubic zirconia. These variations change the physical and optical properties markedly. While the visual likeness of CZ is close enough to diamond to fool most who don't handle diamond regularly, CZ will usually give certain clues. For example: it's somewhat brittle and is soft enough to possess scratches after normal use in jewelry; it's usually internally flawless and completely colorless (whereas most diamonds have some internal imperfections and a yellow tint); its SG (5.6–6) is high; and its reaction under
ultraviolet light is a distinctive beige. Most jewelers will use a thermal probe to test all suspected CZs, a test which relies on diamond's superlative
thermal conductivity (CZ, like almost all other diamond simulants, is a thermal
insulator). CZ is made in a number of different colors meant to imitate fancy diamonds (for example, yellow to golden brown, orange, red to pink, green, and opaque black), but most of these don't approximate the real thing. Some CZs have been given a coating of
diamond-like carbon in an effort to improve their durability, but this doesn't fool a thermal probe.
CZ had virtually no competition until the
1998 introduction of simulated
moissanite (SiC; synthetic silicon carbide). Simulated moissanite is superior to cubic zirconia in two ways: its hardness (8.5-9.25) and low SG (3.2). The former property results in facets that are as sometimes as crisp as a diamond's, while the latter property makes simulated moissanite somewhat harder to spot when unset (although still disparate enough to detect). However, unlike diamond and cubic zirconia, simulated moissanite is strongly
birefringent. This manifests as the same "drunken vision" effect seen in synthetic rutile, although to a lesser degree. All simulated moissanite is cut with the table perpendicular to the optic axis in order to hide this property from above, but when viewed under magnification at only a slight tilt the doubling of facets (and any inclusions) is readily apparent.
The inclusions seen in simulated moissanite are also characteristic: most will have fine, white, subparallel growth tubes or needles oriented perpedicular to the stone's table. It is conceivable that these growth tubes could be mistaken for laser drill holes that are sometimes seen in diamond (see
diamond enhancement), but the tubes will be noticeably doubled in simulated moissanite due to its birefringence. Like synthetic rutile, current simulated moissanite production is also plagued by an as of yet inescapable tint, which is usually a brownish green. A limited range of fancy colors have been produced as well, the two most common being blue and green. Jewel-quality simulated moissanite is produced by only one company,
Charles & Colvard. Its limited availability makes simulated moissanite about 120 times more expensive than cubic zirconia.
Natural simulants
Natural
minerals that (when cut) optically resemble white diamonds are rare, because the trace impurities usually present in natural minerals tend to impart color. The earliest simulants of diamond were colorless
quartz,
topaz, and
beryl (
goshenite); they're all common minerals with above-average hardness (7–8), but all have low RIs and correspondingly low dispersions. Well-formed quartz crystals are sometimes offered as "diamonds," a popular example being the so-called "
Herkimer diamonds" mined in
Herkimer County, New York. Topaz's SG (3.50–3.57) also falls within the range of diamond.
From a historical perspective, the most notable natural simulant of diamond is
zircon. It is also fairly hard (7.5), but more importantly shows perceptible fire when cut, due to its high dispersion of 0.039. Colorless zircon has been mined in
Sri Lanka for over 2,000 years; prior to the advent of modern
mineralogy, colorless zircon was thought to be an inferior form of diamond. It was called "Matara diamond" after its source location. It is still encountered as a diamond simulant, but differentiation is easy due to zircon's anisotropy and strong
birefringence (0.059). It is also notoriously brittle and often shows wear on the girdle and facet edges.
Much less common than colorless zircon is colorless
scheelite. Its dispersion (0.026) is also high enough to mimic diamond, but although it's highly lustrous its hardness is much too low (4.5–5.5) to maintain a good polish. It is also anisotropic and fairly dense (SG 5.9–6.1). Synthetic scheelite produced via the Czochralski process is available, but it has never been widely used as a diamond simulant. Due to the scarcity of natural gem-quality scheelite, synthetic scheelite is much more likely to simulate it than diamond. A similar case is the orthorhombic
carbonate cerussite, which is so fragile (very brittle with four directions of good cleavage) and soft (hardness 3.5) that it's never seen set in jewelry, and only occasionally seen in gem collections because it's so difficult to cut. Cerussite gems have an adamantine luster, high RI (1.804–2.078), and high dispersion (0.051), making them attractive and valued collector's pieces. Aside from softness, they're easily distinguished by cerussite's high density (SG 6.51) and anisotropy with extreme birefringence (0.271).
Due to their rarity fancy-colored diamonds are also imitated, and zircon can serve this purpose too. Applying heat treatment to brown zircon can create several bright colors: these are most commonly sky-blue, golden yellow, and red. Blue zircon is very popular, but it isn't necessarily color stable; prolonged exposure to ultraviolet light (including the UV component in sunlight) tends to bleach the stone. Heat treatment also imparts greater brittleness to zircon and characteristic inclusions.
Another fragile candidate mineral is
sphalerite (zinc blende). Gem-quality material is usually a strong yellow to honey brown, orange, red, or green; its very high RI (2.37) and dispersion (0.156) make for an extremely lustrous and fiery gem, and it's also isotropic. But here again, its low hardness (2.5–4) and perfect dodecahedral cleavage preclude sphalerite's wide use in jewelry. Two calcium-rich members of the
garnet group fare much better: these are
grossularite (usually brownish orange, rarely colorless, yellow, green, or pink) and
andradite. The latter is the rarest and most costly of the garnets, with three of its varieties—
topazolite (yellow),
melanite (black), and
demantoid (green)—sometimes seen in jewelry. Demantoid (literally "diamond-like") especially has been prized as a gemstone since its discovery in the
Ural Mountains in
1868; it's a noted feature of antique
Russian and
Art Nouveau jewelry.
Titanite or sphene is also seen in antique jewelry; it's typically some shade of chartreuse and has a luster, RI (1.885–2.050), and dispersion (0.051) high enough to be mistaken for diamond, yet it's anisotropic (a high birefringence of 0.105–0.135) and soft (hardness 5.5).
Discovered the
1960s, the rich green
tsavorite variety of grossular is also very popular. Both grossular and andradite are isotropic and have relatively high RIs (ca. 1.74 and 1.89, respectively) and high dispersions (0.027 and 0.057), with demantoid's exceeding diamond. However, both have a low hardness (6.5–7.5) and invariably possess inclusions atypical of diamond—the
byssolite "horsetails" seen in demantoid are one striking example. Furthermore, most are very small, typically under 0.5 carats (100 mg) in weight. Their lusters range from vitreous to subadamantine, to almost metallic in the usually opaque melanite, which has been used to simulate black diamond. Some natural spinel is also a deep black and could serve this same purpose.
Composites
Because strontium titanate and glass are too soft to survive use as a ring stone, they've been used in the construction of composite or
doublet diamond simulants. The two materials are used for the bottom portion (pavilion) of the stone, and in the case of strontium titanate, a much harder material—usually colorless synthetic spinel or sapphire—is used for the top half (crown). In glass doublets, the top portion is made of
almandine garnet; it's usually a very thin slice which doesn't modify the stone's overall body color. There have even been reports of diamond-on-diamond doublets, where a creative entrepreneur has used two small pieces of rough to create one larger stone.
In strontium titanate and diamond-based doublets, an
epoxy is used to adhere the two halves together. The epoxy may fluoresce under UV light, and there may be residue on the stone's exterior. The garnet top of a glass doublet is physically fused to its base, but in it and the other doublet types there are usually flattened air bubbles seen at the junction of the two halves. A join line is also readily visible whose position is variable; it may be above or below the girdle, sometimes at an angle, but rarely along the girdle itself.
The most recent composite simulant involves combining a CZ core with an outer coating of laboratory created amorphous diamond. The concept effectively mimics the structure of a cultured pearl (which combines a core bead with an outer layer of pearl coating), only done for the diamond market. Brought to market under the 'Asha' brand name, the finished simulant provides a more lustrous and diamond-like look than plain CZ due to its usage of amorphous diamond.
Further Information
Get more info on 'Diamond Simulant'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://diamond_simulant.totallyexplained.com">Diamond simulant Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |