NEWS
Focus On High-Quality Silicate (Ceramic) Materials
How to Select Zirconium Silicate Grade: A Framework for ZrO₂ Content, Whiteness & Cost Optimization
Key Takeaways
- ZrO₂ content alone does not determine glaze whiteness — impurity levels (Fe₂O₃, TiO₂) and particle size distribution are equally critical.
- Higher ZrO₂ grades provide more opacifying power per unit weight, but the cost-per-opacity-point may follow a different curve than the purchase price alone suggests.
- For ultra-white glazes (L* ≥ 93), combined Fe₂O₃ + TiO₂ below 0.3% is a common benchmark — grades with ZrO₂ ≥ 63% typically meet this threshold TDS.
- Body substrate color is an often-overlooked variable: dark or red-firing bodies may demand a higher-ZrO₂ grade to achieve the same apparent whiteness as a white-firing body would with a mid-range grade.
- The framework presented here is a decision-support tool, not a substitute for a structured lab trial under your actual glaze formulation and firing conditions.
1. Why Grade Selection Is Not Just About ZrO₂
In a typical ceramic tile plant, zirconium silicate is one of the largest raw material cost items in the glaze department. The purchasing conversation often reduces to a single number: "What's your ZrO₂ content?" But treating ZrO₂ as the sole selection criterion overlooks three other parameters that directly affect fired glaze quality:
- Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂ content — even small differences (e.g., 0.13% vs 0.22% Fe₂O₃) can produce a measurable shift in glaze tone, particularly in white and light-colored glazes.
- Particle size distribution — finer grades may deliver higher opacity per unit weight but can affect glaze rheology and application behavior.
- Al₂O₃ and SiO₂ balance — these affect the melting behavior of the opacifier within the glaze matrix and can influence gloss, maturity temperature, and surface quality.
A well-chosen grade balances all four dimensions against the plant's specific constraints: target L* value, body substrate color, firing schedule, and budget per square meter. Goway's zirconium silicate product range spans multiple ZrO₂ and impurity profiles to support this kind of tailored selection.
2. The ZrO₂ Content Spectrum: What Each Range Means
Zirconium silicate grades available in the ceramic market typically span from approximately 50% to 66% Zr(Hf)O₂. Each range represents a different trade-off between opacifying power, impurity profile, and cost. The table below provides a qualitative orientation — actual parameter values vary by supplier and should be verified against the specific TDS.
| Zr(Hf)O₂ Range | Typical Whiteness (1200℃) | Fe₂O₃ (typical) | TiO₂ (typical) | Typical Application | Relative Cost Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ~50–51% | ~85 | ~0.25–0.30% | ~1.5–2.0% | Colored glazes, engobe, dark-body tiles where opacity requirement is moderate | ★ |
| ~59–61% | ~86–88 | ~0.20–0.25% | ~0.5–0.7% | Standard white wall tiles, light-colored floor tiles on white-firing body | ★★ |
| ~63–65% | ~90–92 | ~0.10–0.15% | ~0.10–0.20% | High-white glazes, polished porcelain, super-white wall tiles, red-body coverage | ★★★ |
Ranges represent typical market grades as of 2025–2026. Actual values vary by supplier. Not all ranges are represented in every supplier's portfolio.
3. Parameter Impact Matrix: How ZrO₂ Level Affects Performance
As Zr(Hf)O₂ content increases across the 50%–65% range, several performance parameters shift in predictable directions. The matrix below summarizes these relationships qualitatively, based on well-established principles of ceramic glaze opacification.
| Parameter | ~50% ZrO₂ | ~55% ZrO₂ | ~60% ZrO₂ | ~63-65% ZrO₂ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Opacifying Power (per unit weight) |
Moderate | Moderate-High | High | Very High |
| Whiteness Contribution (fired at 1200℃) |
~83–86 | ~85–88 | ~86–89 | ~90–93 |
| Fe₂O₃ Impurity (typical market range) |
0.25–0.35% | 0.20–0.30% | 0.15–0.25% | 0.08–0.15% |
| TiO₂ Impurity (typical market range) |
1.5–2.5% | 1.0–1.8% | 0.5–1.0% | 0.10–0.25% |
| Relative Cost Per Ton | Baseline | +10–20% | +25–40% | +50–70% |
| Dosage to Achieve Same Opacity | Highest | Higher | Moderate | Lowest |
| Best Suited For | Dark/colored glazes, engobe, cost-sensitive applications | Standard white wall tiles, moderate whiteness requirements | White glazes on white body, general-purpose opacity | Super-white, polished porcelain, red-body coverage, premium applications |
The impurity ranges above describe typical market observations across multiple suppliers. For a specific product, refer to the supplier's TDS. ZrO₂ content alone does not guarantee whiteness — low Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂ at a given ZrO₂ level can outperform a higher-ZrO₂ grade with elevated impurities.
4. The 5-Step Selection Framework
The following framework translates your plant's specific requirements into a target ZrSiO₄ specification. Work through the steps in order — each output becomes an input for the next.
Step 1 — Define Your Target Glaze Whiteness
Measure or specify the L* value (CIE L*a*b*) you need on the fired tile surface. This is the single most important input because it drives the minimum ZrO₂ and maximum impurity thresholds.
If you do not have a specific L* target, use a reference tile from your production or a competitor sample as the benchmark.
Step 2 — Map Your Body Substrate Color
Characterize your tile body as white-firing, light-firing, or red/dark-firing. A dark body requires more opacifying power to achieve the same apparent surface whiteness as a white body, because the glaze layer must mask the underlying color.
For red-firing bodies with an engobe layer, the engobe composition and thickness also affect how much opacity the glaze itself must provide.
Step 3 — Determine Your Impurity Tolerance
Based on Steps 1 and 2, set provisional maximum thresholds for Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂:
- Ultra-white (L* ≥ 93): Fe₂O₃ ≤ 0.15%, TiO₂ ≤ 0.20%, combined ≤ 0.30%
- High-white (L* 90–92): Fe₂O₃ ≤ 0.20%, TiO₂ ≤ 0.50%
- Standard white (L* 86–89): Fe₂O₃ ≤ 0.30%, TiO₂ ≤ 0.80%
- Colored / dark glazes: Higher impurity levels may be acceptable — prioritize ZrO₂ content and cost over impurity thresholds
Step 4 — Identify the ZrO₂ Range
Cross-reference your whiteness target (Step 1), body color (Step 2), and impurity limits (Step 3) against the Parameter Impact Matrix in Section 3. This gives you a provisional ZrO₂ range. For example:
- L* ≥ 92 on red body → likely requires ZrO₂ ≥ 63%
- L* 88–90 on white body → ZrO₂ ~60% may be adequate
- L* ≤ 86, any body → ZrO₂ ~50% may be sufficient
Step 5 — Calculate the Cost-Performance Envelope
For the grades that meet your technical requirements, calculate total opacifier cost per square meter of tile, not just cost per ton. A higher-ZrO₂ grade used at lower dosage may be cost-competitive with a lower-ZrO₂ grade used at higher dosage. The calculation:
Cost/m² = (Price/ton ÷ 1,000,000) × Dosage(g/m²)
Where dosage depends on your glaze application weight and the opacifier percentage in the glaze formula.
5. Worked Example: Applying the Framework
To demonstrate how the framework works in practice, we walk through a realistic selection scenario using Goway C6064 as the reference product. C6064 is a 63.5–64.5% Zr(Hf)O₂ grade with high fired whiteness and low impurity levels TDS.
5.1 Product Data: Goway C6064
| Parameter | Value | Significance for Selection |
|---|---|---|
| Zr(Hf)O₂ | 63.5–64.5% | High opacifying power; suitable for white and super-white glazes |
| Whiteness (1200℃) | 90.5 | Meets the threshold for high-white applications (L* ≥ 90) |
| Fe₂O₃ | 0.13% | Below the 0.15% threshold for ultra-white applications |
| TiO₂ | 0.16% | Below the 0.20% threshold for ultra-white applications |
| Combined Fe₂O₃ + TiO₂ | 0.29% | Below the 0.30% benchmark for ultra-white glazes |
| Al₂O₃ | 1.44% | Relatively low — minimal impact on glaze melting behavior |
| SiO₂ | 33.13% | Within typical range for high-ZrO₂ zirconium silicate |
| L.O.I | 1.01% | Low — indicates minimal volatile content |
5.2 Scenario: Super-White Polished Porcelain Tile
Plant profile: A porcelain tile manufacturer producing 600×600 mm polished tiles on a light-gray firing body. The target surface whiteness after polishing is L* ≥ 92. The plant applies glaze by bell/disk at approximately 450 g/m² (wet), with zirconium silicate at 8–10% of the glaze formula.
Framework application:
| Step | Assessment | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Target Whiteness | L* ≥ 92 after polishing | Ultra-white category |
| 2. Body Substrate | Light-gray firing body — moderate opacity demand | ZrO₂ ≥ 60% minimum; ≥ 63% preferred for safety margin |
| 3. Impurity Tolerance | L* ≥ 92 → Fe₂O₃ ≤ 0.15%, TiO₂ ≤ 0.20% | C6064 meets both: Fe₂O₃ 0.13%, TiO₂ 0.16% ✓ |
| 4. ZrO₂ Range | Matrix → ~63–65% ZrO₂ | C6064 at 63.5–64.5% falls within target ✓ |
| 5. Cost-Performance | Dosage at 8% of glaze × 450 g/m² = 36 g/m² | Calculate total opacifier cost/m²; compare with alternative grades at their effective dosages |
Framework conclusion: C6064 meets all technical thresholds for this scenario (Step 1–4). The remaining step is a cost comparison: test whether a lower-ZrO₂ grade at higher dosage can achieve the same L* ≥ 92 at a lower total cost per square meter — but note that higher dosage of a lower-ZrO₂ grade also introduces proportionally more Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂ into the glaze, which may compromise the whiteness target.
For the full Goway zirconium silicate portfolio including C6060 (59.5–60.5% ZrO₂) and C6050S (50–51% ZrO₂) for lower-whiteness applications, see the zirconium silicate solutions portal.
6. Impurity Thresholds: Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂ Limits by Application
The two chromophoric impurities in zirconium silicate — Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂ — affect glaze color through different mechanisms and at different thresholds. The table below provides application-specific benchmarks derived from industry practice.
| Application | Max Fe₂O₃ | Max TiO₂ | Max Combined | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Super-white glaze (L* ≥ 93) | ≤ 0.10% | ≤ 0.15% | ≤ 0.25% | Even trace Fe₂O₃ can shift hue toward warm/gray; TiO₂ toward cream |
| High-white glaze (L* 90–92) | ≤ 0.15% | ≤ 0.20% | ≤ 0.30% | C6064 (Fe₂O₃ 0.13%, TiO₂ 0.16%) falls within this bracket |
| Standard white (L* 86–89) | ≤ 0.25% | ≤ 0.50% | ≤ 0.60% | Moderate impurity tolerance; cost-performance trade-off becomes relevant |
| Light-colored / pastel glaze | ≤ 0.30% | ≤ 0.80% | ≤ 0.90% | Glaze pigment can mask minor tonal shifts from impurities |
| Dark / saturated glaze | ≤ 0.40% | ≤ 1.50% | ≤ 1.80% | Impurity impact largely masked by glaze pigment; prioritize cost |
| Engobe / underglaze layer | ≤ 0.35% | ≤ 1.00% | ≤ 1.20% | Covered by glaze layer; opacity is the primary function |
Thresholds are industry benchmarks, not absolute pass/fail criteria. Actual tolerance depends on glaze base composition, firing atmosphere (oxidation vs. reduction), and target shade precision. Always confirm with a lab trial.
6.1 How Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂ Affect Glaze Color
- Fe₂O₃ (iron oxide): In oxidation firing, Fe₂O₃ typically imparts a warm yellowish to reddish-brown tint. In reduction firing, Fe₂O₃ may be partially reduced to FeO, shifting the glaze toward gray or green-gray tones. The color impact is roughly proportional to concentration in the low range (0.05–0.30%).
- TiO₂ (titanium dioxide): TiO₂ contributes a cream-to-yellow shift in white glazes. At higher concentrations, it can react with iron to produce a brownish tint. TiO₂ also affects glaze opacity independently — which can be beneficial or detrimental depending on the desired gloss and translucency.
- Combined effect: Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂ interact in the glaze melt. The combined threshold (e.g., ≤ 0.30% for high-white) is often a more practical guide than individual limits, because the two impurities can produce a synergistic color shift that exceeds what either would cause alone.
7. Cost-Performance Optimization: Not Just Price Per Ton
The purchase price per ton is the most visible cost number — but it can be misleading as a selection criterion. A comprehensive cost analysis should account for at least four factors:
Total Opacifier Cost Model
Factor 1 — Effective dosage: A higher-ZrO₂ grade may achieve the target opacity at a lower dosage (e.g., 6% of glaze formula vs. 10% for a lower-ZrO₂ grade). The cost-per-ton difference must be weighed against the dosage difference.
Factor 2 — Glaze formulation adjustments: Switching grades may require adjustments to other glaze components (e.g., frit, clay, or other opacifiers) to maintain the same application behavior and fired properties. These adjustments have their own cost implications.
Factor 3 — Application efficiency: Particle size differences between grades can affect glaze rheology, application weight consistency, and drip/waste rates. A grade that applies more uniformly at the target weight may reduce material waste.
Factor 4 — Quality cost: If a lower-ZrO₂ grade produces a detectable whiteness or tone shift that increases the defect or downgrade rate, the apparent raw material savings may be offset by quality-related costs.
7.1 Cost-Per-Whiteness-Point Calculation
A useful metric for comparing grades across the ZrO₂ spectrum is the cost per unit of whiteness delivered. While this is a simplified metric (it ignores impurity effects on tone), it provides a starting point for cost-performance comparisons:
Cost/Whiteness Point = (Price/ton × Dosage%) ÷ Whiteness(1200℃)
This calculation should be followed by a visual assessment of fired samples, because whiteness numbers alone do not capture the tonal quality (a* and b* values in CIE L*a*b*) that determines perceived color. Two grades with similar whiteness values may produce noticeably different a* or b* readings depending on their impurity profiles.
8. Lab Trial Protocol: Validating Your Selection
The framework identifies which grade(s) are technically suitable. A structured lab trial confirms whether the selected grade performs as expected under your specific conditions. The protocol below is designed to produce actionable data with minimum trial iterations.
- Prepare a reference sample. Fire a tile using your current zirconium silicate grade at your standard glaze formulation and firing schedule. Measure L*, a*, b* on the fired surface (minimum n = 3 tiles, 3 measurement points per tile). This is your baseline.
- Prepare trial samples at 3 dosage levels. For the candidate grade, prepare glaze batches at your current dosage, current dosage −1%, and current dosage +1%. (For example: if current dosage is 8%, test at 7%, 8%, and 9%). This 3-point spread reveals the dosage-response curve.
- Fire all samples together. Place reference and trial tiles in the same kiln run to eliminate firing variation as a confounding variable. Record kiln temperature profile, cycle time, and atmosphere condition.
- Measure and compare. Record L*, a*, b* for all fired tiles. Compare trial samples against the baseline. The goal is to identify the dosage at which the candidate grade achieves L* and tone (a*, b*) equivalent to or better than the baseline.
- Assess application behavior. During glaze preparation, note any differences in wetting behavior, dispersion time, settling rate, and glaze viscosity. These operational factors affect production efficiency and should be factored into the final decision.
- Document and decide. Compile the dosage-response data, visual assessment, and application notes into a one-page trial summary. Calculate the cost per square meter at the effective dosage. Use this data to make the final grade selection.
9. Selection Decision Matrix
The matrix below maps common tile production scenarios to recommended ZrO₂ ranges and impurity thresholds. Use it as a starting point for the 5-step framework, not as a final prescription.
| Application Scenario | Body Type | Target L* | Recommended ZrO₂ Range | Fe₂O₃ Max | TiO₂ Max | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Super-white polished porcelain | White / light gray | ≥ 93 | ≥ 63% | ≤ 0.10% | ≤ 0.15% | Whiteness > Cost |
| High-white wall tile | White-firing | 90–92 | 63–65% | ≤ 0.15% | ≤ 0.20% | Balanced |
| High-white on red body (with engobe) | Red-firing + engobe | 89–91 | 63–65% | ≤ 0.15% | ≤ 0.20% | Coverage > Cost |
| Standard white floor tile | White / light | 86–89 | 59–61% | ≤ 0.25% | ≤ 0.50% | Cost > Whiteness |
| Light-colored glazed tile | White / light | 83–87 | 59–61% | ≤ 0.30% | ≤ 0.80% | Cost primary |
| Dark/colored glaze | Any | n/a | 50–55% | ≤ 0.40% | ≤ 1.50% | Cost primary |
| Engobe / slip layer | Red / dark | n/a | 50–60% | ≤ 0.35% | ≤ 1.00% | Opacity > Whiteness |
The highlighted row (high-white wall tile) is the application where C6064 (Zr(Hf)O₂ 63.5–64.5%, whiteness 90.5, Fe₂O₃ 0.13%, TiO₂ 0.16%) is most directly applicable. (Source: Goway Technical Data Sheet)
10. Common Mistakes in Grade Selection
1. Selecting solely by ZrO₂ content. Two products with the same nominal ZrO₂ can differ significantly in Fe₂O₃ (e.g., 0.10% vs 0.25%) and TiO₂. The higher-impurity product may produce a noticeably different glaze tone, especially in white and light-colored applications. Always compare the full impurity profile.
Better approach: Set impurity thresholds first, then find the lowest-cost grade that meets those thresholds at an acceptable dosage.
2. Ignoring particle size distribution. Particle size (D50, D90) affects opacifying efficiency per unit weight and glaze rheology. A finer grade may provide higher opacity per gram but could increase glaze viscosity, affecting application weight consistency.
Better approach: Include particle size data in your supplier evaluation. If the supplier does not provide D50/D90 on the standard TDS, request it separately.
3. Assuming "higher ZrO₂ = always better." Above certain ZrO₂ levels, the incremental whiteness gain per percentage point of ZrO₂ diminishes, while the cost per percentage point increases sharply. There is a point of diminishing returns where the extra cost is not justified by the visual improvement.
Better approach: Test two grade options side by side. If the visual difference between a 60% and 64% grade is imperceptible to your quality control team under standard lighting, the cost differential may not be justified.
4. Skipping the lab trial before a production switch. Even when a grade "looks right on paper," interactions with your specific glaze base, firing cycle, and application method can produce unexpected results.
Better approach: Follow the 6-step lab trial protocol in Section 8. Budget at least 2–3 working days for a meaningful trial, including glaze preparation, firing, measurement, and data analysis.
5. Comparing cost per ton instead of cost per square meter. Purchase price per ton is the most accessible number, but total opacifier cost per square meter of finished tile is the metric that matters. A 64% ZrO₂ grade that costs 40% more per ton but is used at 20% lower dosage may have a lower cost per square meter than a 60% grade.
Better approach: Always calculate cost/m² at the effective dosage determined by your trial, never at the supplier's recommended dosage alone.
11. Frequently Asked Questions
How do I know which ZrO₂ content I need for my glaze?
Start from your target fired glaze whiteness (L* value), then work backward. As a general starting point: for L* ≥ 92, grades with ZrO₂ ≥ 63% and low Fe₂O₃/TiO₂ are typically required; for L* 88–91, grades around 60% ZrO₂ may suffice; for L* below 88 or where body color is dark, grades around 50% ZrO₂ may be adequate. However, final selection depends on your full glaze composition, body substrate, firing cycle, and opacifier dosage. A structured trial is recommended to confirm performance.
Can I compensate for a lower ZrO₂ grade by increasing dosage?
Partially, but within limits. Increasing the dosage of a lower-ZrO₂ grade can add more total ZrO₂ to the glaze, but it also introduces proportionally more impurities (Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂), which can shift the glaze tone toward yellowish or grayish hues. Above a certain dosage threshold, glaze rheology, application behavior, and firing maturity may also be affected. At some point the extra handling and firing cost may outweigh the raw material savings. A cost-per-whiteness-point calculation is recommended before pursuing this path.
What are the key impurity thresholds when selecting zirconium silicate?
The two most critical impurities are Fe₂O₃ and TiO₂. Fe₂O₃ above approximately 0.2% can impart a warm or grayish tint to white glazes, particularly under reducing firing conditions. TiO₂ above approximately 0.5% may shift glaze color toward cream or yellow. For ultra-white glazes (L* ≥ 93), combined Fe₂O₃ + TiO₂ below 0.3% is a common benchmark. The specific tolerance depends on your glaze base, firing atmosphere, and target shade. Al₂O₃ and SiO₂ content also affect melting behavior and should be factored into glaze formulation calculations.
What is the typical cost difference between 60% and 64% ZrO₂ grades?
Higher-ZrO₂ grades command a premium, but the cost-per-unit-whiteness or cost-per-opacity-point may be more relevant than the raw purchase price. The total cost impact depends on dosage rate, which is influenced by the opacity target. A higher-ZrO₂ grade used at a lower dosage may achieve similar opacity to a lower-ZrO₂ grade used at a higher dosage. Under some formulation scenarios the total additive cost per square meter of tile can be comparable. It is recommended to calculate total opacifier cost per square meter under actual trial conditions.
Is particle size distribution important when selecting a zirconium silicate grade?
Yes. Particle size distribution (typically reported as D50 and D90 values) affects opacifying efficiency, glaze suspension stability, and application behavior. Finer particles generally provide higher opacity per unit weight but may increase glaze viscosity and affect application rheology. Coarser grades may settle more rapidly in the glaze tank. The optimal particle size depends on your application method (bell/disk, spray, or screen printing) and glaze formulation. When requesting samples, include particle size data in your evaluation criteria alongside chemical composition.
12. Request Technical Data & Samples
If you are evaluating zirconium silicate grades for your production, our technical team can support your selection process with the following:
- Full TDS and COA for any Goway zirconium silicate grade, including impurity profiles and particle size data
- Sample coordination for lab trials at your facility, with the option to test multiple grades side by side
- Application-specific dosage guidance based on your glaze system and firing conditions
- Fired sample tiles at your requested dosage levels for visual and instrumental evaluation
Visit the Goway Zirconium Silicate Solutions Portal for product specifications, or contact our team directly with your application details:
- Target product: Wall tile / Floor tile / Porcelain / Other
- Body type: White-firing / Light / Red / Dark
- Target glaze L* value: (if known)
- Current glaze application method: Bell/Disk / Spray / Screen printing
- Firing temperature and cycle: (e.g., 1200℃, 45-minute cycle)
- Estimated monthly volume: (optional)
Technical Notes & Data Sources
Data provenance: All quantitative product parameters cited in this article are sourced from the Goway Technical Data Sheet (version: 2026-05-14) for the specified product code. Market range data (e.g., typical impurity ranges by ZrO₂ level) represent industry observations and are labeled as qualitative orientation.
Evidence tier: Product-specific data (e.g., C6064 parameters) — P1 (TDS/COA). Industry benchmark ranges — P2 (public domain knowledge, ceramic glaze engineering references). The 5-step framework and cost model are decision-support tools, not predictive models.
Parameters not covered in TDS: Particle size distribution (D50, D90) is product-specific and not routinely listed on standard TDS documents. When particle size is a selection criterion, request this data separately from the supplier.
Limitations: The impurity thresholds and whiteness ranges presented are benchmarks, not guarantees. Actual performance depends on glaze base composition, firing atmosphere, kiln temperature uniformity, application method, and production conditions. Laboratory trials under your specific conditions are strongly recommended before any production-scale grade change.
Disclaimer: Final parameters should be verified against the latest batch Certificate of Analysis. This framework is provided for educational and decision-support purposes and does not constitute a product warranty or performance guarantee.
Data verified by Goway Product Team. Last updated: 2026-05-29.
Keyword：
More News
GOWAY INTERNATIONAL MATERIAL CO., LTD
Founded in 2009, we specialize in producing and supplying ,ceramic additives and related products, committing to supplying stable, environmentally friendly,professional and ceramic materials.
Contact UsContact Us
Company Phone/Wechat：86-0757-82131106 / +8613728575572
Company Fax：86-0757-82131106
Whatapp/skype: +8613600032377
E-mail：info6@goway-china.com
Office Address: Room C11-6, Foshan National Torch Innovation and Pioneer Park, Jihua 2nd Road, Chancheng District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province, China.
Factory Address: Nanbian Industrial Zone, Sanshui District, Foshan City Guangdong Province，China.