## 3 Results and Discussion
### Study of the Structure and Phase Composition of Ceramic Samples  
To determine the phase composition, X-ray diffraction analysis of the samples obtained based on pure loam and with additives was carried out. Figure 6a-d show the diffraction patterns of the samples after burning at a temperature of 1170 \({}^{\circ}\)C.  
Figure 5: Samples after burning at a temperature of 1170 \({}^{\circ}\)C: (**a**) sample based on loam without additive. (**b**) Structure of the sample after the compression test. (**c**) Sample with bentonite. (**d**) Structure of the sample after the compression test.  
Figure 6: _Cont._  
Figure 6: Diffractograms of loam-based samples after burning at 1170 \({}^{\circ}\)C: (**a**) without additives. (**b**) With the addition of 15% diatomic from Zhalpak deposit. (**c**) With the addition of 15% diatomic from Utesai deposit. (**d**) With the addition of 15% bentonite clay.  
All of the above diffraction peaks belong to the above phases. The results of the semi-quantitative X-ray diffraction analysis are shown in Table 6.  
The interpretation of the diffractograms and semi-quantitative X-ray phase analysis indicated that augite was present as the main crystalline phase of the samples obtained from pure loam and with the addition of diatomic. In the sample with the addition of bentonite clay, the predominant phase was quartz. In all samples, anorthite was present in small amounts. The addition of diatomic contributed to the formation of a large amount of augite in the composition of the products, which led to increased strength. Although the sample based on loam without additives is dominated by augite, its compressive strength was found to be lower than the strength of the sample (Table 5) with the addition of bentonite clay, which was dominated by quartz (Figure 6d). Probably, the addition of bentonite clay improved the sintering ability of the ceramic shards due to the formation of a large volume of the glass phase, thereby increasing its strength.  
Figure 7 shows the structures of the samples after burning at 1170 \({}^{\circ}\)C.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Compositions**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Name of Mineral Phases and Their Amounts**} \\ \cline{2-4}  & **Augite** & **Quartz** & **Anorthite** \\ \hline Loam-100\% & 49.2\% & 37.7\% & 13.1\% \\ Loam-85\%; & 52.7\% & 34.7\% & 12.6\% \\ diatomic from Zhalpak deposit-15\% & & & \\ Loam-85\%; & 54.7\% & 30.2\% & 15.1\% \\ diatomic from Utesai deposit-15\% & & & \\ Loam-85\%; & 42.7\% & 46.1\% & 11.2\% \\ bentonite clay-15\% & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 6: The phase compositions of samples burned at 1170 \({}^{\circ}\)C.  
Figure 7: Electron microscopic photographs of the structure of samples after burning at 1170 \({}^{\circ}\)C. (**a**) sample based on loam without additives. (**b**) Sample based on loam with 15% diatomic from the Zhalpak deposit. (**c**) Sample based on loam with 15% diatomic from the Utesai deposit. (**d**) Sample based on loam with 15% bentonite.  
The study of the structure of the samples after burning showed (Figure 7) the presence of a significant number of pores. In this case, the structure of the sample based on loam without additives is characterized by large pore sizes and a small amount of the glass phase (Figure 7a). The addition of diatomite led to the formation of a greater glass phase (Figure 7b,c-balls\") and a decrease in the pore size. This is probably why the samples with diatomite additives are more amorphous. The structure of the sample with bentonite also showed the presence of a glass phase (Figure 7d-balls\"). However, the amount is less compared to the samples with diatomite additives.