[Ifeffit] C and N NEXAFS normalization

Bruce Ravel bravel at bnl.gov
Tue Jun 8 13:56:09 CDT 2010

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

The single energy noramlization that you mentioned is what happens
with normalization order of 1.



 Bruce Ravel  ------------------------------------ bravel at 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/

More information about the Ifeffit mailing list