November 2007 - Ifeffit - millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov

Debye-Waller factors for metal oxides ?
by Ian James Drake 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Hi, There is little discussion over the significance of fitted Debye-Waller factors (ss2) found for metal centers in metal oxides of heterogeneous catalysts. I am searching for a better way of determining how reasonable these values are in the fits I get. 1. Are phenomenological models like the correlated Debye model and Einstein model appropriate? It seems that Debye temperatures are hard to find for oxides. 2. Is there an equivalent value for ss2 in x-ray crystallography data that I can refer to for comparison in these materials? What should I look for in reviewing published x-ray crystallographic data? 3. Is the temperature dependence reported for the ss2 for some metals (like Cu and Al) similar to their respective oxides? For example, in Debye-Waller factor calculations reported for Al metal by R.C.G Killean (in J.Phys.F: Metal Phys., v. 4, pg. 1908, 1974), the ss2 changes by a factor of three between 25C and 300C. Would I expect a factor of three increase in crystalline zeolites (AlO4 structural units). 4. Specific to my work: I have studied Al containing oxides at temperatures between 25 and 300 C. I would like to quantify coordination changes by doing EXAFS fitting of the Al K-edge data. The EXAFS was taken at temperature and I observe no change in the broadening of the data. Likewise, the fitting shows no sensitivity in the Debye-Waller factor. It is nearly constant at 0.001 A over the temperatures of interest. Since ss2 and the coordination number (CN) are correlated, I would like a way to bind the error on the fitted CN by modeling real physical changes in the Debye-Waller factors. Do you have any suggestions? Looking forward to your thoughts. Ian Drake Graduate Student UC Berkeley

9 21

New Method for Normalization?
by Barton, David (DG) 30 Mar '09

30 Mar '09

XANES Aficionados, I know most users on this list are hard-core EXAFS analysts, but some of us use XANES analysis to decipher mixed phases or use it to get structural clues when data quality isn't sufficient for EXAFS analysis. Anyway, I have a question for those interested in quantitative analysis of XANES or those that are willing to offer an opinion on methods to normalize raw spectra to get reliable, repeatable comparisons of near-edge features. Has anyone considered using the methods of Penner-Hahn to normalize their data to get reliable intensities of near-edge features? The reference to their method of normalization is below: J. Synchrotron Rad. (2005). 12, 506-510 [doi:10.1107/S0909049504034193] "A method for normalization of X-ray absorption spectra" T.-C. Weng, G. S. Waldo and J. E. Penner-Hahn It is my understanding the Ifeffit uses a linear function to remove the pre-edge and a quadratic for the post-edge and that the Athena's flatten is a subtraction of these functions. This is an excellent method under most scenarios since the background is usually fairly smooth and can be well approximated by a quadratic equation. Personally, I have had only a few rare cases where the quadratic function on the post-edge was not sufficient to reliably normalize the data and in those cases a third-order polynomial was sufficient. Does anyone else have an opinion on using alternative normalization routines? Dave _________________________________ David Barton The Dow Chemical Company

12 22

Ifeffit Ok on BlueWhite64, ...
by Chachi Rojas 03 Feb '09

03 Feb '09

Hi Matt Ifeffit run perfectely (thanks Matt) after installed by your scripts on RC1. Now, a question for Bruce try to install horae-065, but, error message is below: ---------- === The Ifeffit wrapper, Athena, Artemis, and Hephaestus === This is linux. Checking dependencies ... Tk is not installed. Download the latest from http://search.cpan.org/search?module=Tk Failed dependencies. Not installing athena and artemis. ------ Tk modules (version 8.4.15) were installed on /usr, but perl Makefile.PL it does not recognize Some idea Ch. > Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:56:26 -0500 > From: "Matt Newville" <newville(a)cars.uchicago.edu> > Subject: [Ifeffit] Ifeffit and gfortran (was: iffefit compile on > BlueWhite64) > To: "XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit" <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> > Message-ID: > <b8522e3d0708221356y37280877v86ac576fe9b6b96c(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi Chachi, all > > I believe I have a source kit that will build correctly for you using > gfortran. I've tested on three different generations of Fedora/Redhat > linux systems, one with only g77, one with only gfortran, and one with > both, and the installation now works on all of them. > > Please try > http://cars9.uchicago.edu/~ifeffit/src/ifeffit-1.2.10_rc1.tar.gz > > With this tar ball, you will need to install pgplot: > tar xvzf ifeffit-1.2.10_rc1.tar.gz > cd ifeffit-1.2.10 > sh PGPLOT_install > ./configure > make > make install > > (doing the two 'install steps' with sufficient privilege). Again, you > need to install PGPLOT with the provided script. Both the PGPLOT and > Ifeffit installations will use gfortran if available, and g77 if > gfortran is not available. I think it would not be too difficult to > attempt to use Intel's ifort compiler or g95, though I do not know > that it's needed-- all linux distribution come with gcc so have > easy-to-use packages for gfortran (and, for "legacy", g77). > > I did get horae-065 and the python wrappers to build with no trouble > (once the Tk modules were installed) on all systems, though I haven't > done much more than trivial testing. > > Since I tested only on a few linux boxes, I'd be interested in hearing > reports for other systems. > > I'll wait a few days (or more) to hear reports before uploading this > as ifeffit-1.2.10. > > --Matt >

8 9

2007 APS XAFS School
by Julie Olmsted Cross 04 Apr '08

04 Apr '08

The on-line application for the 2007 APS XAFS School is now available at xafs.org http://www.xafs.org/Workshops/APS2007 ~^^~^~^~~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~^~^~ Julie O. Cross Advanced Photon Source Argonne National Lab 9700 South Cass Ave., Bldg. 401/B4204 Argonne IL 60439 tel: 630 327 7825 fax: 630 252 0580 ~^^~^~^~~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~^~^~

5 9

negative amplitude
by Wojciech Starosta 30 Nov '07

30 Nov '07

Sorry if it is FAQ. But I spent some time on fitting without success and have not found answer to this. Does anybody could explain me if negative value of amplitude has any sense. I can get beautiful plot after fit, but unfortunately the message appear concerning negative value of amplitude (amplitudes). How to avoid it. Any written material will be very helpful. I know that I can define amplitude as squared value of new variable. But sometimes it does not work. Ifeffit stops with message that value of this variable cannot be determined With the best regards Wojtek Starosta Institute of Nuclear Chemistry and Technology 03-195 Warsaw, Dorodna 16 Institute of Nuclear Chemistry and Technology --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0649-1, 2006-11-18 Tested on: 2007-11-30 13:45:41 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com

2 1

(no subject)
by Bindu R. 27 Nov '07

27 Nov '07

could you tell me how does one tune the bond angles from the multiple scattreing paths? Bindu Dr.Bindu R. Visiting Scientist DCMP&MS Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Homi Bhabha Road Colaba Mumbai-400 005 India Mobile-919892536830 --------------------------------- Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required. Click here.

4 4

Exafs distance resolution
by Eric Breynaert 27 Nov '07

27 Nov '07

Dear all, Is there a physical limitation determining exafs bond distance resolution? Very often the equation r = pi / 2 deltak is quoted as a measure for bond distance resolution. But as i understand this equation is related to the fourier transform traditionally used for exafs analysis. If exafs fitting is done in k-space, on the raw exafs data without applying fourier or any other filtering transformation is there a physical limitation determining exafs bond distance resolution? This question comes down to the following practical problem. If one has a theoretical model developed using computational chemistry that predicts two different bond lengths within one shell, e.g. an octahedral metal center surrounded by 6 oxygen atoms and this shell is predicted to be split in three subshells for wich the bond length differs only 0.05 angstroms; and this model can be fit very well in k-space with the splitted shell, off course keeping the number of fit parameters below the nyquist criterion. Is there in such a case any physical reason not to fit the experimental data with the splitted shell , but with an averaged 6-atom shell with a larger Debye Waller factor? Best regards, Eric Breynaert

4 3

Re: [Ifeffit] Exafs distance resolution
by Frenkel, Anatoly 27 Nov '07

27 Nov '07

Yes and a very important one - see Ed Stern's talk at the 2001 EXAFS workshop "advanced methods and tricks etc. " His talk is online. Anatoly -----Original Message----- From: ifeffit-bounces(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov <ifeffit-bounces(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> To: ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> Sent: Tue Nov 27 04:44:48 2007 Subject: [Ifeffit] Exafs distance resolution Dear all, Is there a physical limitation determining exafs bond distance resolution? Very often the equation r = pi / 2 deltak is quoted as a measure for bond distance resolution. But as i understand this equation is related to the fourier transform traditionally used for exafs analysis. If exafs fitting is done in k-space, on the raw exafs data without applying fourier or any other filtering transformation is there a physical limitation determining exafs bond distance resolution? This question comes down to the following practical problem. If one has a theoretical model developed using computational chemistry that predicts two different bond lengths within one shell, e.g. an octahedral metal center surrounded by 6 oxygen atoms and this shell is predicted to be split in three subshells for wich the bond length differs only 0.05 angstroms; and this model can be fit very well in k-space with the splitted shell, off course keeping the number of fit parameters below the nyquist criterion. Is there in such a case any physical reason not to fit the experimental data with the splitted shell , but with an averaged 6-atom shell with a larger Debye Waller factor? Best regards, Eric Breynaert _______________________________________________ Ifeffit mailing list Ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit

1 0

(no subject)
by Bindu R. 27 Nov '07

27 Nov '07

Could you tell me how does one gets the information about bond angles? or How does one tune the bond angles in the artemis software? Bindu Dr.Bindu R. Visiting Scientist DCMP&MS Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Homi Bhabha Road Colaba Mumbai-400 005 India Mobile-919892536830 --------------------------------- Now you can chat without downloading messenger. Click here to know how.

1 0

GaN atoms imput page
by codruta.zoican＠yale.edu 26 Nov '07

26 Nov '07

Dear All, Does anyone have an atoms imput page for GaN. I was trying to construct one myself to run a fitting in Artemis but I'm having some difficulties. Thank you, Codruta.

3 2