On Tuesday 08 June 2010 12:52:50 pm Peter Nico wrote:
My thought is why not do a 'standard' hard x-ray type normalization like that shown with an e0 set to the theoretical ionization potential for C or N. I understand that this has problems with the potential of including tailing sigma* transitions or first EXAFS oscillations in the background region because it doesn't extend far enough beyond the edge. However, it seems to me an approach like this must be 'less-wrong' than the more simplistic methods mentioned above and capable of yielding useful data.
Hi Peter, My experience in the low energy area is pretty limited, but from recent data from NSLS U7A, I tend to find that the "normal" Athena thing tends to work pretty well, although it does take a bit of trial and error to find good values for the normalization range. Athena should notice the short data range and set the normalization order to 2 (that seems to have happened in your data). If not, that certainly helps. The single energy noramlization that you mentioned is what happens with normalization order of 1. B -- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel@bnl.gov National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Methods Group at NSLS --- Beamlines U7A, X24A, X23A2 Building 535A Upton NY, 11973 My homepage: http://xafs.org/BruceRavel EXAFS software: http://cars9.uchicago.edu/~ravel/software/exafs/