Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-npwhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-28T18:29:45.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Long term stability of a modern powder diffractometer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2012

Markus Wunschel ,
Robert E. Dinnebier  and
Sander van Smaalen
Markus Wunschel
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Crystallography, University of Bayreuth, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany
Robert E. Dinnebier
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Crystallography, University of Bayreuth, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany
Sander van Smaalen
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Crystallography, University of Bayreuth, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The characteristics of the (101) peak of α-quartz and the (104) peak of the NIST SRM 1976 alumina flat plate standard have been measured in dependence of time for 60 h with Cu-Kα1 radiation in Bragg-Brentano geometry with a Philips X’Pert diffractometer equipped with a primary Ge(111) monochromator. It was found that the reproducibility of the peak position and the peak shape falls well in the ±3σ range, whereas the peak intensity strongly depends on the power history of the X-ray generator and the temperature of the diffraction system. The effects on Rietveld refinements are discussed and recommendations are given for optimized data collection.

Information

Type
Technical Articles
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , September 2001 , pp. 149 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2001

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

Bish, D. L., and Post, J. E. (1989). “Modern Powder Diffraction,” Reviews in Mineralogy, Vol. 20, Mineralogical Society of America, ISBN 0-939950-24-3.Google Scholar
Dinnebier, R. E., and Finger, L. W. (1998). “GUFI 5.0,” Z. Krist. Suppl. ZZZZZZ 15, 148.Google Scholar
Finger, L. W., Cox, D. E., and Jephcoat, A. P. (1994). “A correction for powder diffraction peak asymmetry due to axial divergence,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. JACGAR 27, 892–900. acr, JACGAR CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrish, W. (1983). “Fundamentals of X-ray powder diffractometry: prerequisites for successful computer automation,” lecture notes of a workshop on automated data collection strategies for obtaining good powder diffraction data at the American Crystallographic Association 32nd Annual Denver X-ray Conference Combined Meeting, 1–5 August 1983, Snowmass, CO.Google Scholar
Rietveld, H. M. (1969). “A Profile Refinement Method for Nuclear and Magnetic Structures,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. JACGAR 2, 65–71. acr, JACGAR CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodriguez-Carvajal, J. (1990). Abstracts of the Satellite Meeting on Powder Diffraction of the XV Congress of the IUCr, Toulouse, France, p. 127.Google Scholar
Sonneveld, E. J., and Delhez, R. (1996). “ProFit Windows Software for Profile Analysis,” Philips Analytical X-Ray, Philips Electronics N. V., program version 1.0 of 1996.Google Scholar