Re: [Ifeffit] Ifeffit Digest, Vol 155, Issue 16
Dear Jason
Good topic
We have published a few papers discussing analysis with thickness distributions and roughness. Normally the XERT method will address this especially for small samples.
Particularly see J. L. Glover, C. T. Chantler, M. D. de Jonge, ‘Nano-roughness in gold revealed from X-ray signature,’ Physics Letters A373 (2009) 1177-1180. The general topic of thickness effects is of course wider, and partially addressed in a couple of other papers.
Hope this helps
Chris
------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Chantler, Professor, FAIP
Editor-in-Chief, Radiation Physics and Chemistry
Chair, International IUCr Commission on XAFS
President, International Radiation Physics Society
School of Physics, University of Melbourne
Parkville Victoria 3010 Australia
+61-3-83445437 FAX +61-3-93474783
chantler@unimelb.edu.au chantler@me.com
http://optics.ph.unimelb.edu.au/~chantler/xrayopt/xrayopt.html
http://optics.ph.unimelb.edu.au/~chantler/home.html
________________________________________
From: Ifeffit [ifeffit-bounces@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov] on behalf of ifeffit-request@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov [ifeffit-request@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov]
Sent: Sunday, 31 January 2016 5:00 AM
To: ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
Subject: Ifeffit Digest, Vol 155, Issue 16
Send Ifeffit mailing list submissions to
ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ifeffit-request@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
You can reach the person managing the list at
ifeffit-owner@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Ifeffit digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Effect of gradual thickness variation in beam (Jason Gaudet)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:32:43 -0500
From: Jason Gaudet
On 01/27/2016 07:05 PM, Jason Gaudet wrote:
I'm planning on some transmission-mode XAS with smaller than usual sample tubes. I'm realizing I might be in danger of creating excessive non-uniformity in my samples by having the beam size on the same order of magnitude as the sample tube radius.
For example, let's say I want to measure liquid in a sample tube with a 1000 micron outer diameter, with a beam 500 microns wide and centered on the sample tube. If the tube is orthogonal to the ring plane, the entire vertical portion of the beam will pass through the same length of liquid. But in the horizontal plane, the center of the beam will pass through 1000 microns of sample while the edges of the beam will pass through 866 microns of sample, due to the curvature of the sample cell across the horizontal plane.
Most of what I know about the statistics of thickness effects are about leakage and pinholes - nonlinearity caused by a few spots having very low or negligible sample thickness. But I don't know how significant a "mild" thickness distribution might be. If this sort of thickness distribution is going to be an issue it would be great to know that beforehand and either go with larger samples, smaller beam size, or more creative orientation.
Jason,
There may be some distortion to the data due to the varying thickness. On the plus side, liquids tend to be very homogeneous.
Probably the best solution to this situation, if it's available at the beamline, is to focus the beam in the vertical, for example, using a flat mirror on a bender. Focusing to a spot would also address the thickness situation, but you need to be mindful that the intense beam could generate radicals from the liquid, causing sample damage.
If the sample is sufficiently concentrated, then you could simply slit the beam down to 100 or 200 microns and still have enough for a transmission measurement. In fact, that would be the way to decide if you are seeing a big problem from the shape of the tube. Compare the mu(E) with the slits at 500 to mu(E) with the slits at 100 (carefully aligning the sample both times, of course). If they are the same, then, then you're golden.
B
-- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel@bnl.gov
National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Science Group at NSLS-II Building 535A Upton NY, 11973
Homepage: http://bruceravel.github.io/home/ Software: https://github.com/bruceravel Demeter: http://bruceravel.github.io/demeter/ _______________________________________________ Ifeffit mailing list Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit Unsubscribe: http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/ifeffit
participants (1)
-
Christopher Thomas Chantler