Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T23:37:38.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Role of Diffractometer Geometry in the Standardization of Polycrystalline Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

William Parrish
William Parrish*
Affiliation:
IBM Research Laboratory, San Jose, California 95193
Get access

Abstract

This paper reviews the factors in diffractometer geometry most likely to cause large errors in intensity measurements due to imperfect specimen preparation, particularly preferred orientation. It is recommended the same specimen be transferred to two or more diffractometer geometries in which the specimen has different orientations to obtain sets of complementary data. Three geometries are illustrated: θ-2θ scanning with reflection and transmission specimens, and Seeman-Bohlin with reflection specimen.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in X-Ray Analysis , Volume 17: Twenty-Second Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, August 22-24, 1973 , 1973 , pp. 97 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Paakkari, T., Suortti, P and Inkinen, O., “A Contributlon to the Powder Intensity Project of the International Union of Crystallography,” Ann. Acad, Sci. Fennicae A.VI. 345. 3–29 (1970).Google Scholar
2. Parrish, W., “X-Ray Powder Diffraction Analysis: Film and Geiger Counter Techniques,” Science 110, 368–371 (1949).Google Scholar
3. Wilson, A. J. C., “Mathematical Theory of X-Ray Powder Diffractometry,” Philips Technical Library (1963).Google Scholar
4. Parrish, W., Mack, M and Taylor, J., “Determination of Apertures in the Focusing Plane of X-Ray Powder Diffractometers,” Jour, Sci. Instr. 43, 623–628 (1966).Google Scholar
5. Gould, R. W., Bates, S. R. and Sparks, C. J., “Application of the Graphite Monochromator to Light Element X-Ray Spectroscopy,” Appl. Spectr. 22, 549–551 (1968).Google Scholar
6. deWolff, P. M., “Focussing Monochromators and Transmission Techniques,” Norelco Reporter XV, 44–49 (1968).Google Scholar
7. Parrish, W and Mack, M., “Seeman-Bohlin X-Ray Diffractometry. I. Instrumentation. II. Comparison of Aberrations and Intensity With Conventional Diffractometer,” Acta Cryst. 23, 687–700 (1967).Google Scholar
8. Parrish, W., “X-Ray Analysis Papers,” Centrex Publ. Co., Eindhoven (1965).Google Scholar
9. deWolff, P. M., “Diffractometer Measurements of Low-Order Powder Reflections,” Acta Cryst. 13, 835–837 (1960).Google Scholar
10. Parrish, W., “X-Ray Diffractometry Methods for Complex Powder Patterns,” in van Olphen, H. and Parrish, W., Editors, X-Ray and Electron Methods of Analysis, p. 1–35, Plenum Press (1968).Google Scholar
11. Segmüller, A. and Angilello, J., “Automatic Pole Figure Evaluation,” Jour. Appl. Cryst. 2, 76–80 (1969).Google Scholar