Re: [Ifeffit] Is it legitimate to merge transmission data with fluorescence data?

2009-08-10 Thread Bruce Ravel
On Monday 10 August 2009 06:13:32 pm jrkiz...@ncsu.edu wrote: Dear XAFS community members, I have a question concerning data merge. We normally collect XAFS data in both transmission mode and fluorescence mode. We normally have to merge a few scans to enhance signal-to-noise ratio. For one

Re: [Ifeffit] Installation of FEFF8 on IFEFFIT

2009-08-10 Thread Bruce Ravel
I have a question of the FEFF8 installation in IFEFFIT on a window XP. I know that the IFEFFIT includes FEFF6, and I have the licence of FEFF8. I have used IFEFFIT with FEFF6 on the window and FEFF8 in a LINUX system. Now I want to use the FEFF6 on the windos XP. After I unzipped the ifeffit

Re: [Ifeffit] Is it legitimate to merge transmission data with fluorescence data?

2009-08-10 Thread Matt Newville
Dear Fiona, I think it would be pretty unusual for transmission and fluorescence data measured at the same time to be of comparable quality and both be noisy-but-good-enough that merging would actually help. Are you sure that the data a similar enough (no pinhole or self-absorption effects) that

Re: [Ifeffit] Is it legitimate to merge transmission data withfluorescence data?

2009-08-10 Thread Matthew
A trick I've used when the fluorescence data are good but affected by overabsorption, and the transmission data are noisy is to reduce both data sets to post-edge normalized form (0 in pre-edge, oscillating about 1 post-edge), then apply a simple overabsorption model to 'correct' the