Hi Matthew, Jana,

I think the Chantler values, especially in Hephaestus, are not particularly robust at the Ca L edges.

To be clear, Elam gives L3, L2, and L1 energies as 346.2, 349.7, and 438.4 eV, and the edge jumps as 5.8, 1.4, and 1.1. I believe those edge jumps may have originated from Shaltout -- maybe Bruce can clarify that.

The Chantler data from the NIST FFast web page (and in Hephaestus) are quite sparse. This is a definitely a problem for using the anomalous scattering factors near edges. I've talked with Chris Chantler about this a few times over the years. Not too long ago, he sent me data on a finer grid -- but he also told be recently that he hoped to have even better data he could send to me soon (all time-scales here on months-to-years here).

I've included the finer data I have from Chantler into Larch. But the results for the Ca L edges are still not encouraging. The attached figure and ASCII data file give the results for mu(E) (gr/cm^2) from Elam and from Chantler. It's hard to see an L2 edge in either, and Chantler does not show an L1 edge.

FWIW, the script to generate this is:

####################
energies = linspace(300, 500, 101)
muca_chantler = mu_chantler('Ca', energies)
muca_elam = mu_elam('Ca', energies)

newplot(energies, muca_chantler, ymax = 50000, label='Chantler')
plot(energies, muca_elam, label='Elam')

info_head = 'Ca edge Energy(eV) Fyield   EdgeJump'

info_l3 = ' L3       %.1f    %.5f    %.2f' % xray_edge('Ca', 'L3')
info_l2 = ' L2       %.1f    %.5f    %.2f' % xray_edge('Ca', 'L2')
info_l1 = ' L1       %.1f    %.5f    %.2f' % xray_edge('Ca', 'L1')

write_ascii('CaMu.dat', energies, muca_elam, muca_chantler,
             info_head, info_l3, info_l2, info_l1,
             label='Energy MuCa_Elam MuCa_Chantler')

########################

I'm not sure that gives a lot of insight except that not trusting Chantler's values for these values might be reasonable.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Matthew Marcus <mamarcus@lbl.gov> wrote:

I'm not after absolute data, just the edge-jump ratio. This would have to be extracted by peak+arctan fitting because any spectra will have peaks and a very limited
range between edges. If the Chantler numbers are incorrect, then perhaps the edge-jump ratio is really 2.

Do you have a reference which can be cited?

I'll try the CXRO tool next, since CXRO specializes in soft X-rays.
mam

On 9/23/2015 11:49 PM, Jana Padeznik Gomilsek wrote:

It is very hard to measure or to calculate absolute absorption data, especially in the
vicinity of the absorption edges and especially in the soft x-ray region. Therefore there
are significant differences between the tables and I think nobody knows which
are better.
Chantler, for example, says the expected uncertainties of the tables in your region are
50 % to 100 % (http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/FFast/Text2000/sec06.html#tab2).
I would doubt the Chantler's L3+.1 number, all other numbers look ok - this is what you
can get.

jana padeznik gomilsek

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 18:02:08 -0700
From: Matthew Marcus<mamarcus@lbl.gov>
To: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit<ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov>
Subject: [Ifeffit] Problem with Hephaestus at Ca L-edges
Message-ID:<56034B90.70405@lbl.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

I wanted to work out the edge-jump ratio between the L3 and L2 edges of Ca using Hephaestus. I ran into two problems:

1. The ratio implied by what it says for the unit-edge-step thickness does not agree with that derived by computing the absorption (cm^2/gm) above and below each edge and
dividing the difference (L3+ - L3-)/(L2+ - L2-).

2. The results differ wildly depending on which resource I use:

L3-.1 L3+.1 L2-.1 L2+.1 (L1+ - L1-)/(L2+ - L2-)
Elam 4759.796 27837.796 27478.018 38434.277 2.106375908
Chantler 4322.6 6547.121 32827.61 35436.543 0.852655473
Cromer-Leiberman 4288.524 33471.375 32786.294 47072.991 2.042659055

The Henke table doesn't yield an L2 edge jump at all, while the Shaltout yields the same results as Cromer-Leiberman. Which one should I trust and why?

This is old-style H. (V0.18), not Demeter.
mam

_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit

_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit

--Matt