>However, if you carefully read some of his recent papers, you may
>find the answer there (the paper on CeO2 by his group was published in Chem.
>Mater.; I don't have it handy but can find out the exact citation if
>needed).
I hope this was not exactly the same sample because a Round Robin
is s
My further thought on this thread about publishing copyrighted material
is that anyone who flagrantly says "here are the ICSD entries for ..."
is welcoming a visit from the authorities. Both the person and that
person's employer may be liable to civil penalties. I'm not a lawyer,
but I do read t
> >Yes, it was done (see J. Appl. Cryst. 26 (1993) 97-103) and the
> >column-length distribution function appears to have an "acceptable"
> >asymmetric shape for tested samples.
>
> You mean that whatever a Voigt function, it corresponds to a
> reasonable size distribution function ? This is hard
>Yes, it was done (see J. Appl. Cryst. 26 (1993) 97-103) and the
>column-length distribution function appears to have an "acceptable"
>asymmetric shape for tested samples.
You mean that whatever a Voigt function, it corresponds to a
reasonable size distribution function ? This is hard to believ
> -Original Message-
> From: Armel Le Bail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, 17 November 2000 2:16 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Size/Strain Round Robin and Rietveld method
SNIP SNIP
> Best,
> Armel Le Bail
> http://www.cristal.org/
> PS - Are the results
>
> >Very often, a simple assumption that
> >size-broadened profile has both Lorentzian and Gaussian terms yields
> >satisfactory results.
>
> Well, this assumption is easily entered in a pseudo-Voigtian or Voigtian
> profile shape model. But the corresponding size Fourier coefficients
> AnS are
>Very often, a simple assumption that
>size-broadened profile has both Lorentzian and Gaussian terms yields
>satisfactory results.
Well, this assumption is easily entered in a pseudo-Voigtian or Voigtian
profile shape model. But the corresponding size Fourier coefficients
AnS are never checked
Dear Armel:
Although I sent the message unintentionally to the whole list, why not have
a public discussion.
> including Gaussian. But the size model is currently only
> Lorentzian in ARIT. There is no way to have a pure Gaussian
> shape for the size effect since it corresponds to unphysical
> s
>One comment regarding ARIT. I didn't go carefully through all the results
>but my impression is your values are a bit underestimated. If you added
>additional Gaussian term to your An, you should get results much closer to
>WA. That should be relatively simple in your model (I think:-)? Of cours
Hi Armel:
I am impressed -- nice report:-)
One comment regarding ARIT. I didn't go carefully through all the results
but my impression is your values are a bit underestimated. If you added
additional Gaussian term to your An, you should get results much closer to
WA. That should be relatively si
Hello,
For the impatients wishing to compare (I am - why
waiting so long...), here are some Size/Strain
Round Robin results from a participation by using
a Rietveld program :
http://sdpd.univ-lemans.fr/microstruct/ssrr/
Owing to the simplicity of the CeO2 pattern (no
overlapping), a Rietveld p
11 matches
Mail list logo
