Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-fg9bn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-17T06:51:09.658Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Importance of Consistent 1/d Scans in Determining Size and Strain by Powder Diffraction Profile Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Y. Zhang ,
J. H. Stewart ,
C. R. Hubbard  and
B. Morosin
Y. Zhang
Affiliation:
Previous address: Department of Chemistry, University of Maryland, College Park, MD. Current address: Ceramics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD
J. H. Stewart
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry, University of Maryland, College Park, MD;
C. R. Hubbard
Affiliation:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Bldg, 4515, MS 6064, P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN
B. Morosin
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque, NM
Get access

Abstract

This paper reports and discusses the results of a computer modeling study on powder diffraction profile analysis for crystallite size and strain of polycrystalline materials. The results of this computer modeling show that if the spans of diffraction profiles in reciprocal space (1/d) are not carefully chosen, an overestimation on size and an underestimation on strain may result in analysis by both the Warren-Averbach and the Hall-Williamson methods. A general way to eliminate such errors based on profile fitting and regeneration is presented and discussed in this paper.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in X-Ray Analysis , Volume 33: Thirty-Eighth Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, July 31 - August 4, 1989 , 1989 , pp. 373 - 381
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Warren, B. E., “X-ray Diffraction,” London: Addison Wesley, Chapter 13 (1969).Google Scholar
2. Hall, W. H., Proc. Phys. Soc. A62: 741 (1949).Google Scholar
3. Delhez, R., deKeijser, Th. H., and Mittermeijer, E. J., in Accuracy in Powder Diffraction, Block, S. and Hubbard, C. R., eds., NBS Special Publication 567, p. 213 (1980).Google Scholar
4. Taupin, D., J. Appl. Cryst. 6: 266 (1973).Google Scholar
5. Parrish, W., Huang, T. C., and Ayers, G. L., Trans. Am. Crystallogr. Assoc. 12: 65 (1976).Google Scholar
6. Enzo, S. and Parrish, W., Advances in X-ray Analysis 27: 37 (1984).Google Scholar
7. Langford, J. I., Louer, D., Sonneveld, E. J., and Visser, J. W., Powder Diffraction 13, p. 211 (1986).Google Scholar
8. Spencer, R. C., J. Appl. Phys. 20: 413 (1949).Google Scholar
9. Klug, H. P. and Alexander, L. E., “X-ray Diffraction Procedures for Polycrystalline and Amorphous Materials,” 2nd ed., Wiley-Interscience (1974).Google Scholar
10. Stewart, J. K., Zhang, Y., Hubbard, C. R., Morosin, B., and Venturini, E. L., “XRAYL: A New Powder Diffraction Profile Refinement Program,” NIST-IR 88-3850 (1988).Google Scholar
11. Stewart, J. M., Zhang, Y., Hubbard, C. R., and Morosin, B., “CRYSIZ; A New Powder Diffraction Profile Analysis Computer Code,” in preparation (1989).Google Scholar
12. Morosin, B. and Graham, R. A., X-Ray Diffraction Line-broadening Studies on Shock Modified Rutile and Alumina, Materials Sci. and Eng. 66: 73 (1984).Google Scholar