Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T22:35:45.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An experimental investigation of the effects of axial divergence on diffraction line profiles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

R. W. Cheary
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Physics, University of Technology Sydney, P.O. Box 123, Broadway, New South Wales, 2007, Australia
A. A. Coelho
Affiliation:
CSIRO Minerals, P.O. Box 124, Port Melbourne, Victoria, 3207, Australia

Abstract

An experimental investigation has been carried out to determine the extent to which axial divergence in a conventional powder diffractometer influences the measurement of peak profile parameters. A Siemens D5000 θ–2θ diffractometer was used for this study along with the LaB6 line profile standard SRM 660. Eight unique levels of axial divergence were investigated either by removing one or more of the Soller slits, or by introducing different combinations of Soller slits in the incident and diffracted beams. The measure of axial divergence used throughout is based on the maximum axial divergences of the incident and diffracted beams, Ψi and Ψd. Axial divergence produces a small and almost constant shift δ2θp in the peak angle which in a typical diffractometer would amount to a zero offset 2θ≈0.005°. The integrated intensity of a profile increases almost linearly with the product Ψi*Ψd. The increase in breadth in profiles in the angular region 2θ<120° arises mainly from the change in asymmetry DH=HloHhi in which one side of the profile broadens (i.e., either the high angle or low angle side) without any significant broadening of the other side. Moreover, the asymmetry DH is linearly dependent on 2θ for a fixed level of axial divergence, and linearly dependent on the total axial divergence Ψid at fixed 2θ.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

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

Berger, H. (1986). “Study of the Cu Kα Emission Spectrum,” X-Ray Spectrom. 15, 241243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheary, R. W., and Coelho, A. A. (1992). “A Fundamental Parameters Approach to Line Profile Fitting,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 25, 109121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheary, R. W., and Cline, J. P. (1995). “An Analysis of the Effect of Different Instrumental Conditions on the Shapes of X-ray Powder Line Profiles,” Adv. X-Ray Anal. 38, 7582.Google Scholar
Cheary, R. W., Cline, J. P., and Anast, M. (1996). “Characterisation and Modelling of Peak Shifts in Conventional Powder Diffractometry,” Adv. X-Ray Anal. (in press).Google Scholar
Finger, L. W., Cox, D. E., and Jephcoat, A. P. (1994). “A Correction of Powder Diffraction Peak Asymmetry due to Axial Divergence,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 27, 892900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klug, H. P., and Alexander, L. E. (1974). X-ray Diffraction Procedures for Polycrystalline and Amorphous Materials (Wiley, New York), 2nd ed., pp. 293–294.Google Scholar
Rasberry, S. D. (1989). Certificate of Analysis, SRM 660 “Instrument Line Position and Profile Shape Standard for X-ray Diffraction,” NIST, Gaithersburg, MD 20899.Google Scholar
Snyder, R. L. (1993). “Analytical Profile Fitting of X-ray Powder Diffraction Profiles,” in The Rietveld Method, edited by R. A. Young (International Union of Crystallography, Oxford University Press, New York), pp. 115–119.Google Scholar
Wilson, A. J. C. (1963). Mathematical Theory of X-ray Powder Diffractometry (Gordon and Breach, New York), pp. 37–45.Google Scholar
Wilson, A. J. C. (1980). “Accuracy in Methods of Lattice Parameter Measurement,” in Accuracy in Powder Diffraction, National Bureau of Standards Special Publication No. 567 (US GPO, Washington, DC), pp. 325–352.Google Scholar