Brilliance 98 · Fire 72 · Scintillation 96 · in our census, where the T73 scores 98 · 69 · 80 in zircon
How the DG-Rafaello handles light in zircon, measured: brilliance 98, fire 72 and 2% leakage, set against the T73 in the same stone and against the same cut in diamond.
Light Return map of the DG-Rafaello in zircon, face-up, from our own tracer at refractive index 1.925. Red, green and blue return light to the eye; gray leaks.
DG-Rafaello Zircon
Zircon has a refractive index of 1.925 to 1.984 and a dispersion of 0.039. Its critical angle, from the low end of that range, is 31.3°, so a round design needs a pavilion of at least 37.2° for head-on light to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. We trace it with one index, 1.955, the midpoint of the published range, and a fire spread of 0.034, 0.86 of the published dispersion. Every picture here is our Light Return tracer at 1.925, and every figure is from the same light census that scores the other gemstones; the 3D Gemstone Simulator shows the DG-Rafaello in zircon live. Zircon is strongly doubly refractive (birefringence up to 0.059), so its back facets can look doubled. Our census traces one index (1.955), so the doubling is not in these figures.
The DG-Rafaello has 145 facets and a total depth of 59.0% of its width; its pavilion mains sit at 40.0°. In zircon, the census returns 98 of 100 for brilliance and 72 for fire, against 98 and 69 for the T73, our benchmark, in the same stone; the same DG-Rafaello in diamond reads 94 and 80.
Is zircon good in a DG-Rafaello? Pros and cons, measured
Compared with the T73 Round Brilliant in zircon and with the DG-Rafaello in diamond.
A difference counts from 3 points (Brilliance, Fire, Tilt, Leakage), 5 (Scintillation,
Symmetry), 4% (face-up size per carat) or 5% (weight); Tilt counts as a pro only for a stone within
5 points of the brilliance it is compared with. How we measure.
All eight scores against the T73
At a glance: the DG-Rafaello in zircon (white) against the T73 Round Brilliant in zircon (dashed): solid white where
it reaches further, hatched where it falls short. Each pro and con is explained, with pictures, below.
Against the T73 Round Brilliant in zircon: ahead on 4, level on 3, behind on 1.
Global90, the comparison 88, difference +2
Brilliance98, the comparison 98, difference 0
Fire72, the comparison 69, difference +3
Scintillation96, the comparison 80, difference +16
Spread101, the comparison 100, difference +1
Symmetry100, the comparison 100, difference 0
Shape-norm105, the comparison 105, difference 0
Tilt79, the comparison 82, difference −3
Face-up light census, a different measure from the Cut Grading Tool; Spread and Shape-norm above 100 sit on the ring. Spread is the census's estimate from depth alone; the face-up size in the pros and cons is measured from each model's outline. Open it in the Cut Performance Wheel; these are the same census figures as our Cut Performance Index.
What the DG-Rafaello gains in zircon
More facets, more sparkle
Scintillation 96 against 80 for the T73 Round Brilliant in zircon: 16 points higher
Scintillation follows the number of facets the stone shows: 100 × (1 − e^(−facets / 45)). The DG-Rafaello has 145 facets and the T73 73, so 96 against 80. It depends on the geometry alone, so it is the same in every stone.
Scintillation follows the number of facets: more facets, more and smaller flashes as the stone moves. Compare the facet counts under the drawings; each drawing shows only the crown. Drawn from each cut's own model.
Face-up size 106 against 100 for the T73 Round Brilliant in zircon (T73 = 100): 6% more face-up area for the same weight
Face-up size is the outline's area per carat, measured from each model (T73 = 100): 106 for the DG-Rafaello against 100 for the T73. The same volume spread over a longer or shallower outline shows more face for the weight; it is the same in every stone, because specific gravity scales every cut alike.
DG-Rafaello · 6.04 mm at 1.00 ct · Face-up size 106
T73 Round Brilliant · 5.90 mm at 1.00 ct · Face-up size 100
Both stones weigh 1.00 ct in zircon and are drawn to the same scale in millimeters, from each cut's own model. Face-up size is the outline's area per carat, with the T73 at 100: a deeper stone, or a rounder outline, spreads less area for its weight.
Brilliance 98 against 94 for the DG-Rafaello in diamond: 4 points higher
The same cut in diamond returns 94. Zircon bends light less than diamond: its critical angle is 31.3°, diamond's 24.4°, so a pavilion facet has to be steeper before light reflects off it rather than passing out. The DG-Rafaello's pavilion returns more of zircon's light than of diamond's, as the two maps show.
DG-Rafaello in zircon · Brilliance 98
DG-Rafaello in diamond · Brilliance 94
Red, green and blue = light returning to the eye; gray = leakage, light that leaves heading down or stays inside. This is the head-on view; the Brilliance score averages a wider cone of light, so the score can differ from what one picture shows.
Leakage 2 against 5 for the DG-Rafaello in diamond: 3 points lower
Leakage is the share of the census rays that enter the stone and leave through the pavilion, or through the crown heading down. The DG-Rafaello leaks 2% in zircon against 5% for the same cut in diamond. Grey in the maps below is leaking light; the share under each picture is that picture's own.
DG-Rafaello in zircon · Leakage 2
0° · 0% leak
10° · 6% leak
20° · 20% leak
30° · 31% leak
DG-Rafaello in diamond · Leakage 5
0° · 4% leak
10° · 4% leak
20° · 7% leak
30° · 17% leak
Each frame is the Light Return map with the stone tilted away from you by the angle shown; gray is leakage. The share under each frame is that picture's own.
1.25 ct at 6.5 mm, against 0.94 ct for the same cut in diamond (+33%)
Weight follows specific gravity: 4.665 for zircon against 3.52 for diamond, so the same model at the same size weighs 1.25 ct here and 0.94 ct in diamond, 6.5 mm across. Nothing about the light changes with it.
A DG-Rafaello 6.5 mm across, weighed from the model's measured volume and each stone's specific gravity.
Tilt 79 against 97 for the DG-Rafaello in diamond: 18 points lower
Tilt is how much of its face-up brilliance a stone keeps when the census tilts it 20° about its long axis, with 2,200 rays. The DG-Rafaello keeps 79 against 97 for the same cut in diamond. The tilt strips below show the maps at 0°, 10°, 20° and 30°, with each picture's own leak share under it.
DG-Rafaello in zircon · Tilt 79
0° · 0% leak
10° · 6% leak
20° · 20% leak
30° · 31% leak
DG-Rafaello in diamond · Tilt 97
0° · 4% leak
10° · 4% leak
20° · 7% leak
30° · 17% leak
Tilt is how much of its own face-up light a stone keeps when tilted. Each frame is the Light Return map with the stone tilted away from you by the angle shown; gray is leakage. The share under each frame is that picture's own.
What helps:the DG-M5 reads 98 for tilt in zircon, the best of the cuts we score there.
Fire 72 against 80 for the DG-Rafaello in diamond: 8 points lower
Fire is the share of the returned light that splits into color at the exit facet: the census traces each exit again at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread (0.034 in zircon) and counts a ray as fire when the two directions differ by more than 0.6°. The DG-Rafaello reads 72 against 80 for the same cut in diamond. The figure is the census's; the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders zircon's fire live.
The fire figure is the census's, traced at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread. See the fire in the 3D Gemstone Simulator: the DG-Rafaello in zircon under the sunny-day lighting.
What helps:the DG-Elongated Hexagon reads 93 for fire in zircon, the best of the cuts we score there.
Pick the DG-Rafaello in zircon for this: it has more facets to sparkle with, faces up larger for its weight, returns more light than in diamond and leaks less than in diamond. The catch: it weighs more than in diamond, loses more light when tilted than in diamond and shows less fire than in diamond.
If that catch matters more to you, the DG-M5 reads 98 for tilt in zircon, the best of the cuts we score there.
Every figure on this page is from our light census, traced at one refractive index: a simulation of the geometry, not a grading report. The 3D files and cutting files below are the same DG-Rafaello model we traced.
DG-Rafaello Zircon: questions
Is the DG-Rafaello a good cut for zircon?
In our census the DG-Rafaello returns 98 of 100 for brilliance and 72 for fire in zircon, against 98 and 69 for the T73 in the same stone. Against that round and against the same cut in diamond it has 4 pros and 3 cons by our thresholds; the summary above names them.
What pavilion angle does zircon need?
At least 37.2° for a round design: zircon's critical angle is 31.3°, from the low end of its refractive index range, and head-on light has to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. The DG-Rafaello's pavilion mains sit at 40.0°.
How much does a DG-Rafaello weigh in zircon?
At 6.5 mm across, 1.25 ct in zircon, against 0.94 ct for the same cut in diamond (+33%): zircon's specific gravity is 4.665, diamond's 3.52.
Can I see the DG-Rafaello in zircon in 3D?
Yes: the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders it live, with zircon's own refractive index and dispersion. Zircon is traced by the same light census as the other gemstones, with its refractive index and fire spread derived from published values, so its scores are on the same scale; the pictures here are our Light Return tracer, and the Cut Performance Wheel sets it against any other cut and stone.
Get the DG-Rafaello Cut files
6 formatsMillimetersWatertight
DG-Rafaello Cut 3D files
The DG-Rafaello Cut as exact geometry: 145 planar facets, real-world scale, ready for CAD,
rendering, printing and casting.
