# [Ifeffit] Peaks in MCA spectra

George Sterbinsky GeorgeSterbinsky at u.northwestern.edu
Tue Apr 1 11:56:25 CDT 2014

```Hi Matthew,

Hephaestus shows the strength of the Ll emission to be about 10% of the La2
emission. When fitting the spectrum as a sum of Gaussians, I find that the
area of of the Gaussian used to fit the Ll is 24% of that used to fit the
La2. What would cause the ratio determined from tabulated data to differ
from that found in the data I collected? Am I misunderstanding the meaning
of the "strength" value in Hephaestus?

Thanks,
George

On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Matthew Marcus <mamarcus at lbl.gov> wrote:

> OK, I think the "other Matt" has solved it - it's the L1 peak.  I was
> confused by an inaccurate attempt at reading the energy scale.
> Also, I somehow didn't read correctly the branching ratio from Hephaestus.
>         mam
>
>
> On 3/31/2014 8:57 PM, George Sterbinsky wrote:
>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Matt Newville <
>> newville at cars.uchicago.edu <mailto:newville at cars.uchicago.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi George,
>>
>>     Calibrated spectra would help, but if we guess the calibration is 0.56
>>     bins/ eV, then we'd have
>>
>>
>> I've attached a plot of the data showing the x-axis in keV. Also, as
>> requested by Zack, I've attached a two column data file.
>>
>>
>>        line             E (eV)       bin #
>>     ---------------------------------------------
>>     Co La1,2       775          434
>>     O Ka1,2         525          294
>>     C Ka1,2         277          155
>>
>>     which looks  pretty good.     This puts the the unknown peak near
>>     380/0.56 which is 678 eV.   Tthat's very close to Co Ll (M1->L3),
>>     which is at 677 eV, and should be a bit less than 10%  of Co La1 and
>>     La2, which is roughly right.
>>
>>
>> Based on fitting the spectrum with Gaussians, the Co LI is 24% of the
>> La2. As you mention, a value of roughly 10% is expected. What could cause
>> such a discrepancy?
>>
>>
>>     So, I think it's Co Ll.  That says the sample is just Co, C, and O.
>>     Is that reasonable?
>>
>>
>> Yes, it is. I think maybe a little fluorine too, but it is very weak as I
>> mention in my response to Matthew.
>>
>>
>>     What surprises me is that there is no signal from the elastic peak.
>>     Was that somehow filtered out?
>>
>>
>> No, if there is an elastic peak it is probably lost under the Co La2.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> George
>>
>>     The fact that the counts don't go to
>>     zero between C and O could be many factors, including incomplete
>>     charge collection.  This (and Compton scattering) generally make peaks
>>     have a slightly non-Gaussian shape, with a low-energy tail.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Cheers,
>>
>>     --Matt
>>
>>     On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 5:01 PM, George Sterbinsky
>>     <GeorgeSterbinsky at u.northwestern.edu <mailto:GeorgeSterbinsky at u.
>> northwestern.edu>> wrote:
>>      > Hello,
>>      >
>>      > I am writing with a general XAS question. It does not necessarily
>> pertain to
>>      > Ifeffit, however, I think the topic is something some, maybe most,
>> list
>>      > members will be knowledgeable about. So it seems like this list is
>> a good
>>      > place to post this question.
>>      >
>>      > On to the question. I have attached a plot of a MCA spectrum
>> collected with
>>      > a vortex silicon drift detector. The spectrum is actually the
>> average of
>>      > several spectra, all collected in the post edge region of the Co
>> L-edge. The
>>      > spectra were averaged to reduce noise. The three peaks result from
>>      > fluorescence from carbon, oxygen, and cobalt. Low-energy shoulders
>> on the Co
>>      > and O peaks are also observed. These can be seen as the regions of
>> the
>>      > spectrum that are not well reproduced by the fit. The main reason
>> I included
>>      > the fit in the plot is to illustrate the presence of these
>> shoulders,
>>      > particularly in the oxygen florescence, where the additional
>> intensity is
>>      > not so obvious.
>>      >
>>      > I am writing to see if anyone has any suggestion as to what the
>> origins of
>>      > these peaks might be. They are not due to additional elements, as
>> they
>>      > appear at the same incident energies as the main florescence
>> peaks, i.e. the
>>      > Co shoulder appears at the same incident energies as the main Co
>> peak, and
>>      > the O shoulder appears at the same incident energies as the main O
>> peak. It
>>      > is possible that the peaks result form other transitions.
>> Considering Co,
>>      > the main peak is due to L3/L2-M4 transitions, and the shoulder is
>> in a
>>      > position that could be consistent with L3/L2-M1 transitions.
>> However, by
>>      > fitting the peaks with Gaussians, one finds an area for the
>> shoulder that is
>>      > about 25% of the area of the main peak. This is significantly
>> larger than
>>      > what one might expect from tabulated transition strengths like
>> those given
>>      > in Hephaestus.
>>      >
>>      > To summarize, does anyone know what these shoulders might result
>> from if not
>>      > lower energy transitions? If they are low energy transitions, why
>> would the
>>      > relative transition strengths differ from tabulated values?
>>      >
>>      > Thank you,
>>      > George
>>      >
>>      >
>>      >
>>      >
>>      > _______________________________________________
>>      > Ifeffit mailing list
>>      > Ifeffit at millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov <mailto:Ifeffit at millenia.cars.
>> aps.anl.gov>
>>      > http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
>>      >
>>
>>
>>
>>     --
>>     --Matt Newville <newville at cars.uchicago.edu <
>> http://cars.uchicago.edu>> 630-252-0431 <tel:630-252-0431>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Ifeffit mailing list
>>     Ifeffit at millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov <mailto:Ifeffit at millenia.cars.
>> aps.anl.gov>
>>     http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ifeffit mailing list
>> Ifeffit at millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
>> http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
> Ifeffit mailing list
> Ifeffit at millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
> http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/pipermail/ifeffit/attachments/20140401/bd433930/attachment.html>
```