Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

[Reinhard Kleeberg]

Dear Radovan,
may be you are right, but this great development will unfortunately  
not help the big number of lab diffractionists to puzzle the patterns  
to be analyzed in their daily business ;-)

Best regards

Reinhard

Zitat von Radovan Cerny :


Dear Reinhard,

I wouldn't say "solely from the detector side". The biggest  
improvement is synchrotron radiation (+2D detectors🤓).


Best greetings from Lac Leman

Radovan Cerny

Envoyé à partir de Outlook pour Android

From: rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr  on  
behalf of Reinhard Kleeberg 

Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 1:49:57 PM
To: rietveld_l@ill.fr 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

Dear Luca,
I completely agree and will be very happy to have a 1D detector with
sufficient energy resolution to resolve a "pure" Cu Kalpha1/2 doublet
from W Lalpha1. This would make routine work much easier. IMHO, the
biggest improvements in XRPD instrumentation within the last decades
came solely from the detector side, should be continued.

Regarding search-match by Rietveld: Your FSPM method is a very
inspiring idea. Nicola Doebelin has incorporated a simplified approach
in PROFEX, too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oqj71TiifeI

I'm routinely applying a run of ~500 structures/minerals what we are
commonly using (+- the former QPA database of Seifert AUTOQUAN or from
the BGMN webpage) for a phase screening of unknown samples, needs ~ 5
min without interaction. Than running QPA refinement with the best
matching structures, clicking on remaining peaks in the difference
plot for getting a proposal of best matching main line positions in
the database, and adding these structure(s) to the refinement, running
again... This is a typical workflow in our lab, no need for peak
search, background treatment, thinking about artifact peaks...

Best regards

Reinhard

Zitat von Luca Lutterotti :


Dear Reinhard and Rietvelders,

It is always a compromise. Ideally we would like the fastest
instrument with a lot of intensity (so, 1D or 2D detectors) but no
lines outside the Kalpha or even just the Kapha1 like the one of
James Cline. But this means a monochromator on the incident beam and
you get fluorescence background. Now I like your solution of the Si
Drift detector, so you just cut the fluorescence and you don’t need
the monochromator in the first place.
So we are working and we are testing some lab prototypes of a 1D Si
Drift like detector to get the best of both world. It is only a lot
of electronic, but one day we will have wonderful instrument with
only the lines we need and no fluorescence for the background.
Actually we use fluorescence for the chemical analysis (quantitative).

About the search-match problem. Have a look on our FPSM method (
http://fpsm.radiographema.com/) where we don’t care about extra
lines as it is a Rietveld search-match. We don’t need to identify or
search peaks. We don’t use peak positions, we just fit with the
Rietveld. It is slower indeed, but every day is becoming faster and
in a few years it will run quickly on our cellphones (I have a
prototype running there).

Best regards,

Luca

 

Luca Lutterotti
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
Università di Trento
via Sommarive, 9 - 38123 Trento (Italy)
tel. +39 0461 2824-14 (Office), -34 (X-Ray lab)




Maud: http://maud.radiographema.com 



Begin forwarded message:

From: Reinhard Kleeberg 
Subject: Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline
Date: 5 September 2023 at 08:56:15 CEST
To: rietveld_l@ill.fr
Reply-To: Reinhard Kleeberg 

Dear Luca,
I completely agree with your opinion, and want to add that even for
"trivial" tasks in XRPD like phase analysis and standard Rietveld
refinements the satellites/spectral impurities do cause significant
trouble:

- The K beta and W L satellites of strong peaks of major phases
like quartz, carbonates or cubic structures in geomaterials are
typically not automatically recognized in the standard peak search
procedures and therefore misinterpreted to be K alpha peaks and
added to the peak list. I can't tell you how often I was asked from
colleagues for explanation of such "unidentified peaks", and how
much time people have spent for searching for explanation of such
artefact lines.
- In Rietveld analysis our software must generate the peaks at
least for the measured angular range. Depending on the method how
the software is doing this, we run into problems with the
satellites. If the software generates the reflections from the
positions of K alpha peaks from the start lattice parameters and
the (extended) upper measured angle, K beta satellites of K alpha
peaks outside this angular range will maybe not generated and
remain unfitted in the pattern. If the software generates the peaks
depending on the shortest wavelength in the wavelength profile
(more intelligent approach), the software must generate much more
reflections (with 

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

[Radovan Cerny]

Dear Reinhard,

I wouldn't say "solely from the detector side". The biggest improvement is 
synchrotron radiation (+2D detectors🤓).

Best greetings from Lac Leman

Radovan Cerny

Envoyé à partir de Outlook pour Android

From: rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr  on behalf of 
Reinhard Kleeberg 
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 1:49:57 PM
To: rietveld_l@ill.fr 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

Dear Luca,
I completely agree and will be very happy to have a 1D detector with
sufficient energy resolution to resolve a "pure" Cu Kalpha1/2 doublet
from W Lalpha1. This would make routine work much easier. IMHO, the
biggest improvements in XRPD instrumentation within the last decades
came solely from the detector side, should be continued.

Regarding search-match by Rietveld: Your FSPM method is a very
inspiring idea. Nicola Doebelin has incorporated a simplified approach
in PROFEX, too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oqj71TiifeI

I'm routinely applying a run of ~500 structures/minerals what we are
commonly using (+- the former QPA database of Seifert AUTOQUAN or from
the BGMN webpage) for a phase screening of unknown samples, needs ~ 5
min without interaction. Than running QPA refinement with the best
matching structures, clicking on remaining peaks in the difference
plot for getting a proposal of best matching main line positions in
the database, and adding these structure(s) to the refinement, running
again... This is a typical workflow in our lab, no need for peak
search, background treatment, thinking about artifact peaks...

Best regards

Reinhard

Zitat von Luca Lutterotti :

> Dear Reinhard and Rietvelders,
>
> It is always a compromise. Ideally we would like the fastest
> instrument with a lot of intensity (so, 1D or 2D detectors) but no
> lines outside the Kalpha or even just the Kapha1 like the one of
> James Cline. But this means a monochromator on the incident beam and
> you get fluorescence background. Now I like your solution of the Si
> Drift detector, so you just cut the fluorescence and you don’t need
> the monochromator in the first place.
> So we are working and we are testing some lab prototypes of a 1D Si
> Drift like detector to get the best of both world. It is only a lot
> of electronic, but one day we will have wonderful instrument with
> only the lines we need and no fluorescence for the background.
> Actually we use fluorescence for the chemical analysis (quantitative).
>
> About the search-match problem. Have a look on our FPSM method (
> http://fpsm.radiographema.com/) where we don’t care about extra
> lines as it is a Rietveld search-match. We don’t need to identify or
> search peaks. We don’t use peak positions, we just fit with the
> Rietveld. It is slower indeed, but every day is becoming faster and
> in a few years it will run quickly on our cellphones (I have a
> prototype running there).
>
> Best regards,
>
> Luca
>
>  
>
> Luca Lutterotti
> Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
> Università di Trento
> via Sommarive, 9 - 38123 Trento (Italy)
> tel. +39 0461 2824-14 (Office), -34 (X-Ray lab)
>
>
> 
>
> Maud: http://maud.radiographema.com 
>
>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: Reinhard Kleeberg 
>> Subject: Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline
>> Date: 5 September 2023 at 08:56:15 CEST
>> To: rietveld_l@ill.fr
>> Reply-To: Reinhard Kleeberg 
>>
>> Dear Luca,
>> I completely agree with your opinion, and want to add that even for
>> "trivial" tasks in XRPD like phase analysis and standard Rietveld
>> refinements the satellites/spectral impurities do cause significant
>> trouble:
>>
>> - The K beta and W L satellites of strong peaks of major phases
>> like quartz, carbonates or cubic structures in geomaterials are
>> typically not automatically recognized in the standard peak search
>> procedures and therefore misinterpreted to be K alpha peaks and
>> added to the peak list. I can't tell you how often I was asked from
>> colleagues for explanation of such "unidentified peaks", and how
>> much time people have spent for searching for explanation of such
>> artefact lines.
>> - In Rietveld analysis our software must generate the peaks at
>> least for the measured angular range. Depending on the method how
>> the software is doing this, we run into problems with the
>> satellites. If the software generates the reflections from the
>> positions of K alpha peaks from the start lattice parameters and
>> the (extended) upper measured angle, K beta satellites of K alpha
>> peaks outside this angular range will maybe not generated and
>> remain unfitted in the pattern. If the software generates the peaks
>> depending on the shortest wavelength in the wavelength profile
>> (more intelligent approach), the software must generate much more
>> reflections (with maxima outside the measured angular range) and
>> all these peaks must be calculated over an

Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

[Reinhard Kleeberg]

Dear Luca,
I completely agree and will be very happy to have a 1D detector with  
sufficient energy resolution to resolve a "pure" Cu Kalpha1/2 doublet  
from W Lalpha1. This would make routine work much easier. IMHO, the  
biggest improvements in XRPD instrumentation within the last decades  
came solely from the detector side, should be continued.


Regarding search-match by Rietveld: Your FSPM method is a very  
inspiring idea. Nicola Doebelin has incorporated a simplified approach  
in PROFEX, too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oqj71TiifeI

I'm routinely applying a run of ~500 structures/minerals what we are  
commonly using (+- the former QPA database of Seifert AUTOQUAN or from  
the BGMN webpage) for a phase screening of unknown samples, needs ~ 5  
min without interaction. Than running QPA refinement with the best  
matching structures, clicking on remaining peaks in the difference  
plot for getting a proposal of best matching main line positions in  
the database, and adding these structure(s) to the refinement, running  
again... This is a typical workflow in our lab, no need for peak  
search, background treatment, thinking about artifact peaks...


Best regards

Reinhard

Zitat von Luca Lutterotti :


Dear Reinhard and Rietvelders,

It is always a compromise. Ideally we would like the fastest  
instrument with a lot of intensity (so, 1D or 2D detectors) but no  
lines outside the Kalpha or even just the Kapha1 like the one of  
James Cline. But this means a monochromator on the incident beam and  
you get fluorescence background. Now I like your solution of the Si  
Drift detector, so you just cut the fluorescence and you don’t need  
the monochromator in the first place.
So we are working and we are testing some lab prototypes of a 1D Si  
Drift like detector to get the best of both world. It is only a lot  
of electronic, but one day we will have wonderful instrument with  
only the lines we need and no fluorescence for the background.  
Actually we use fluorescence for the chemical analysis (quantitative).


About the search-match problem. Have a look on our FPSM method (
http://fpsm.radiographema.com/) where we don’t care about extra  
lines as it is a Rietveld search-match. We don’t need to identify or  
search peaks. We don’t use peak positions, we just fit with the  
Rietveld. It is slower indeed, but every day is becoming faster and  
in a few years it will run quickly on our cellphones (I have a  
prototype running there).


Best regards,

Luca

 

Luca Lutterotti
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
Università di Trento
via Sommarive, 9 - 38123 Trento (Italy)
tel. +39 0461 2824-14 (Office), -34 (X-Ray lab)




Maud: http://maud.radiographema.com 



Begin forwarded message:

From: Reinhard Kleeberg 
Subject: Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline
Date: 5 September 2023 at 08:56:15 CEST
To: rietveld_l@ill.fr
Reply-To: Reinhard Kleeberg 

Dear Luca,
I completely agree with your opinion, and want to add that even for  
"trivial" tasks in XRPD like phase analysis and standard Rietveld  
refinements the satellites/spectral impurities do cause significant  
trouble:


- The K beta and W L satellites of strong peaks of major phases  
like quartz, carbonates or cubic structures in geomaterials are  
typically not automatically recognized in the standard peak search  
procedures and therefore misinterpreted to be K alpha peaks and  
added to the peak list. I can't tell you how often I was asked from  
colleagues for explanation of such "unidentified peaks", and how  
much time people have spent for searching for explanation of such  
artefact lines.
- In Rietveld analysis our software must generate the peaks at  
least for the measured angular range. Depending on the method how  
the software is doing this, we run into problems with the  
satellites. If the software generates the reflections from the  
positions of K alpha peaks from the start lattice parameters and  
the (extended) upper measured angle, K beta satellites of K alpha  
peaks outside this angular range will maybe not generated and  
remain unfitted in the pattern. If the software generates the peaks  
depending on the shortest wavelength in the wavelength profile  
(more intelligent approach), the software must generate much more  
reflections (with maxima outside the measured angular range) and  
all these peaks must be calculated over an extremely broad angular  
range. In the case of low symmetry structures with big cells or  
disordered structures described by partial structure factors and  
the resulting extreme high numbers of peaks, the "extension effect"  
will cause significantly prolonged time for calculations, without  
any positive effect.


That's why I prefer to use instrumentation with better  
monochromatic radiation (monochromators, high energy resolution  
detectors) even in the daily business of phase analysis. We do use  
our 1D detector Mythe

Fwd: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

[Luca Lutterotti]

Dear Reinhard and Rietvelders,

It is always a compromise. Ideally we would like the fastest instrument with a 
lot of intensity (so, 1D or 2D detectors) but no lines outside the Kalpha or 
even just the Kapha1 like the one of James Cline. But this means a 
monochromator on the incident beam and you get fluorescence background. Now I 
like your solution of the Si Drift detector, so you just cut the fluorescence 
and you don’t need the monochromator in the first place.
So we are working and we are testing some lab prototypes of a 1D Si Drift like 
detector to get the best of both world. It is only a lot of electronic, but one 
day we will have wonderful instrument with only the lines we need and no 
fluorescence for the background. Actually we use fluorescence for the chemical 
analysis (quantitative).

About the search-match problem. Have a look on our FPSM method (
http://fpsm.radiographema.com/) where we don’t care about extra lines as it is 
a Rietveld search-match. We don’t need to identify or search peaks. We don’t 
use peak positions, we just fit with the Rietveld. It is slower indeed, but 
every day is becoming faster and in a few years it will run quickly on our 
cellphones (I have a prototype running there).

Best regards,

Luca

 

Luca Lutterotti
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
Università di Trento
via Sommarive, 9 - 38123 Trento (Italy)
tel. +39 0461 2824-14 (Office), -34 (X-Ray lab)




Maud: http://maud.radiographema.com 


> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Reinhard Kleeberg 
> Subject: Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline
> Date: 5 September 2023 at 08:56:15 CEST
> To: rietveld_l@ill.fr
> Reply-To: Reinhard Kleeberg 
> 
> Dear Luca,
> I completely agree with your opinion, and want to add that even for "trivial" 
> tasks in XRPD like phase analysis and standard Rietveld refinements the 
> satellites/spectral impurities do cause significant trouble:
> 
> - The K beta and W L satellites of strong peaks of major phases like quartz, 
> carbonates or cubic structures in geomaterials are typically not 
> automatically recognized in the standard peak search procedures and therefore 
> misinterpreted to be K alpha peaks and added to the peak list. I can't tell 
> you how often I was asked from colleagues for explanation of such 
> "unidentified peaks", and how much time people have spent for searching for 
> explanation of such artefact lines.
> - In Rietveld analysis our software must generate the peaks at least for the 
> measured angular range. Depending on the method how the software is doing 
> this, we run into problems with the satellites. If the software generates the 
> reflections from the positions of K alpha peaks from the start lattice 
> parameters and the (extended) upper measured angle, K beta satellites of K 
> alpha peaks outside this angular range will maybe not generated and remain 
> unfitted in the pattern. If the software generates the peaks depending on the 
> shortest wavelength in the wavelength profile (more intelligent approach), 
> the software must generate much more reflections (with maxima outside the 
> measured angular range) and all these peaks must be calculated over an 
> extremely broad angular range. In the case of low symmetry structures with 
> big cells or disordered structures described by partial structure factors and 
> the resulting extreme high numbers of peaks, the "extension effect" will 
> cause significantly prolonged time for calculations, without any positive 
> effect.
> 
> That's why I prefer to use instrumentation with better monochromatic 
> radiation (monochromators, high energy resolution detectors) even in the 
> daily business of phase analysis. We do use our 1D detector Mythen2 with Fe 
> filter (Co radiation) only for "quick and dirty" measurements.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Reinhard
> 
> 
> Zitat von Luca Lutterotti :
> 
>> Dear Habib,
>> 
>> Reinhard is right, and what he explained is exactly what you observed. Now I 
>> would add that I may not define your Bruker clean and optimised, because for 
>> this kind of samples, wafers and extremely textured thin films, it would be 
>> better to have a monochromator in the incident beam and not a Ni filtered (I 
>> would more say it is a requirement). It was already showed many times in the 
>> past as a monochromator in the incident beam is a necessity for this 
>> materials to avoid all the "physical artifacts" created by the strong 
>> intensity and not clean Kalpha radiation.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Luca
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Luca Lutterotti
>> Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
>> Università di Trento
>> via Sommarive, 9 - 38123 Trento (Italy)
>> tel. +39 0461 2824-14 (Office), -34 (X-Ray lab)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Maud: http://maud.radiographema.com 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 4 Sep 2023, at 12:20, Habib Boughzala  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Many thanks Reinhard,
>>> 
>>> That's exac

Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

[Reinhard Kleeberg]

Dear Francois,
even older XRPD people may be confused by any satellites, especially  
when switching from "traditional" instrumentation (e.g. graphite  
monochromator + szinti) towards "modern" instruments, my personal  
experience ;-)


Thanks for your documents, very helpful. The table containing the  
tungsten L series peaks is included in the PROFEX software also, at  
least the wavelengths without intensities. One can go to PROFEX menue  
Edit-Preferences-Cursors and activate the wavelengths for display with  
the spectral line cursor. I typically routinely check the W Lalpha1,  
the most intense one, when analysing data from 1D detectors or unknown  
instruments.


Regarding traditional peak search software:
Old ones do simply search for any maxima on 2theta and apply Bragg's  
law, assuming monochromatic radiation.
But if the instrument is known and the spectral features including  
impurities are included in the wavelength model, not only Rietveld  
profile refinement can be improved: The convolution-based  
("Fundamental parameter") peak model can be used also in a peak search  
procedure by independent peak fitting ("Parrish fitting"). Joerg  
Bergmann had written an algorithm "EFLECH" in the 1980ies, see  
literature [1] at

http://www.bgmn.de/methods.html.
This software EFLECH is now included in the PROFEX software for peak  
search, see:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acMK2z7d_QY
Here, spectral impurities can not get misinterpreted, as they are part  
of the fit model.


Young people may be interested in Nicola Doebelin's video channel:
https://www.youtube.com/@profextutorials2325/videos

Best regards

Reinhard




Zitat von francois Goutenoire :


Dear everyone,

A very nice discussion to help young people in the field of powder  
diffraction.
In our case we are the happy user of two "quick and dirty"  
diffractometers (no brand of course !)
but with two different radiations : copper and cobalt with  
respectively Nickel and Iron K filter + Modern strip detector
Then in order to check for chemical or spectral pollution ?  we  
combine the both set of data in order to check and explain all the  
peaks.

Otherwise, we use Topas V5 to calculate all the tungstene pollution.
Sometimes many with some old X-ray tube (4 years !)
To help you few documents ( sorry some are in french).
https://perso.univ-lemans.fr/~fgouten/Spectral_Pollution

Best wishes François

Le 05/09/2023 à 08:56, Reinhard Kleeberg a écrit :

Dear Luca,
I completely agree with your opinion, and want to add that even for  
"trivial" tasks in XRPD like phase analysis and standard Rietveld  
refinements the satellites/spectral impurities do cause significant  
trouble:


- The K beta and W L satellites of strong peaks of major phases  
like quartz, carbonates or cubic structures in geomaterials are  
typically not automatically recognized in the standard peak search  
procedures and therefore misinterpreted to be K alpha peaks and  
added to the peak list. I can't tell you how often I was asked from  
colleagues for explanation of such "unidentified peaks", and how  
much time people have spent for searching for explanation of such  
artefact lines.
- In Rietveld analysis our software must generate the peaks at  
least for the measured angular range. Depending on the method how  
the software is doing this, we run into problems with the  
satellites. If the software generates the reflections from the  
positions of K alpha peaks from the start lattice parameters and  
the (extended) upper measured angle, K beta satellites of K alpha  
peaks outside this angular range will maybe not generated and  
remain unfitted in the pattern. If the software generates the peaks  
depending on the shortest wavelength in the wavelength profile  
(more intelligent approach), the software must generate much more  
reflections (with maxima outside the measured angular range) and  
all these peaks must be calculated over an extremely broad angular  
range. In the case of low symmetry structures with big cells or  
disordered structures described by partial structure factors and  
the resulting extreme high numbers of peaks, the "extension effect"  
will cause significantly prolonged time for calculations, without  
any positive effect.


That's why I prefer to use instrumentation with better  
monochromatic radiation (monochromators, high energy resolution  
detectors) even in the daily business of phase analysis. We do use  
our 1D detector Mythen2 with Fe filter (Co radiation) only for  
"quick and dirty" measurements.


Best regards

Reinhard


Zitat von Luca Lutterotti :


Dear Habib,

Reinhard is right, and what he explained is exactly what you  
observed. Now I would add that I may not define your Bruker clean  
and optimised, because for this kind of samples, wafers and  
extremely textured thin films, it would be better to have a  
monochromator in the incident beam and not a Ni filtered (I would  
more say it is a requirement). It was alread

Re: [EXT] [External] Re: Step-like basline

[francois Goutenoire]

Dear everyone,

A very nice discussion to help young people in the field of powder 
diffraction.
In our case we are the happy user of two "quick and dirty" 
diffractometers (no brand of course !)
but with two different radiations : copper and cobalt with respectively 
Nickel and Iron K filter + Modern strip detector
Then in order to check for chemical or spectral pollution ?  we combine 
the both set of data in order to check and explain all the peaks.

Otherwise, we use Topas V5 to calculate all the tungstene pollution.
Sometimes many with some old X-ray tube (4 years !)
To help you few documents ( sorry some are in french).
https://perso.univ-lemans.fr/~fgouten/Spectral_Pollution

Best wishes François

Le 05/09/2023 à 08:56, Reinhard Kleeberg a écrit :

Dear Luca,
I completely agree with your opinion, and want to add that even for 
"trivial" tasks in XRPD like phase analysis and standard Rietveld 
refinements the satellites/spectral impurities do cause significant 
trouble:


- The K beta and W L satellites of strong peaks of major phases like 
quartz, carbonates or cubic structures in geomaterials are typically 
not automatically recognized in the standard peak search procedures 
and therefore misinterpreted to be K alpha peaks and added to the peak 
list. I can't tell you how often I was asked from colleagues for 
explanation of such "unidentified peaks", and how much time people 
have spent for searching for explanation of such artefact lines.
- In Rietveld analysis our software must generate the peaks at least 
for the measured angular range. Depending on the method how the 
software is doing this, we run into problems with the satellites. If 
the software generates the reflections from the positions of K alpha 
peaks from the start lattice parameters and the (extended) upper 
measured angle, K beta satellites of K alpha peaks outside this 
angular range will maybe not generated and remain unfitted in the 
pattern. If the software generates the peaks depending on the shortest 
wavelength in the wavelength profile (more intelligent approach), the 
software must generate much more reflections (with maxima outside the 
measured angular range) and all these peaks must be calculated over an 
extremely broad angular range. In the case of low symmetry structures 
with big cells or disordered structures described by partial structure 
factors and the resulting extreme high numbers of peaks, the 
"extension effect" will cause significantly prolonged time for 
calculations, without any positive effect.


That's why I prefer to use instrumentation with better monochromatic 
radiation (monochromators, high energy resolution detectors) even in 
the daily business of phase analysis. We do use our 1D detector 
Mythen2 with Fe filter (Co radiation) only for "quick and dirty" 
measurements.


Best regards

Reinhard


Zitat von Luca Lutterotti :


Dear Habib,

Reinhard is right, and what he explained is exactly what you 
observed. Now I would add that I may not define your Bruker clean and 
optimised, because for this kind of samples, wafers and extremely 
textured thin films, it would be better to have a monochromator in 
the incident beam and not a Ni filtered (I would more say it is a 
requirement). It was already showed many times in the past as a 
monochromator in the incident beam is a necessity for this materials 
to avoid all the "physical artifacts" created by the strong intensity 
and not clean Kalpha radiation.


Best regards,

Luca

 

Luca Lutterotti
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
Università di Trento
via Sommarive, 9 - 38123 Trento (Italy)
tel. +39 0461 2824-14 (Office), -34 (X-Ray lab)




Maud: http://maud.radiographema.com 


On 4 Sep 2023, at 12:20, Habib Boughzala 
 wrote:


Many thanks Reinhard,

That's exactly what I wanted to say by  "I can assure that our 
Bruker D8 is clean and optimized!"
Otherwise, in some other cases of well conditioned thin film no 
similar phenomenon is observed!

So, yes, it's obviously possible that your point of view is right.

Regards
Habib


-- Message d'origine --
De "Reinhard Kleeberg" >

À "Habib Boughzala" mailto:boughz...@yahoo.com>>
Cc rietveld_l@ill.fr 
Date 04/09/2023 11:07:50
Objet Re: Re[2]: [EXT] Re: [External] Re: Step-like basline


Dear Habib,
the phenomenom "satellites or edges" originates from the 
diffraction process. The critical parameters are:
- spectral pureness of the primary beam (primary beam 
monochromator, tube spectral contamination like W...)

- the use of K beta absorbtion filter (and its thickness)
- the energy resolution ("window") of the detector system.
Even a D8 system may be equipped with different types of detectors, 
slits and energy limits can be set differently for an identical 
configuration, and quite often satellite peaks may appear later in 
the time of use (aging of the tube produces more