Luca,
I understood Gerard's problem to have a measurement of a powder (of unknown particle shape) in Bragg-Brentano geometry, for structure refinement. As you said the graininess problem can be minimized primarily by grinding and to a certain extent by rotation and enhancing the divergence, axial as well as equatorial. It is obvious that overmuch graininess would prohibit any reasonable structure refinement or quantitative phase analysis, with or without the application of a harmonic model for intensity correction. Regarding the PO of powder mounts produced from minerals (big crystals) by grinding (McCrone mill, particle size 1-5 µm) and front- back- or sideloading the powder we must state that it is frequently present, of course strongly dependent from the particle shape (by cleavage) of the crystals. Not only platy or needle-like crystals tend to PO, but also cubes (e.g. halite), octahedra (e.g. fluorite), rhombohedra (e.g. calcite), pinakoids (e.g. feldspars) show PO because such crystals tend to stacking and orientation "face by face", like bricks, in a real powder mount. The variation of the preparation technique (say sideloading instead of frontloading) does induce changes in PO what can be used to identify PO, as I understood Frank's recommendation. This is indeed the "trick" we apply every second week if a sample is suspicious to be not adequately prepared. I remember also that an intentionally enhancement of PO by preparation may also be applied for indexing and to add information in structure refinement (of multiple patterns, McCusker..). Of course the degree of orientation in such prepared powder samples is probably not as high as in your "real textured" samples, but m.r.d.'s in the magnitude of 3 (or down to 0.5) may appear. I believe this is weak texture in the context of texture analysis? For such (in my opinion also real and textured) powder samples, a model similar to the harmonics works fine for PO correction, provided that enough measurable peaks are in the pattern. E.g. the application of a model having 3 parameters to a cubic material showing only 2 different lattice planes in the one-dimensional scan must fail of course. Other problems may arise when two directions (e.g. h00 and 0k0) show strongly overlapping peaks by pseudo-symmetry, or when the intensity of a lot of hkl is very week for structural reasons. In all these cases the one-dimensional powder pattern contains not enough information to apply such a harmonic model, the model must be deactivated, a better (more random) sample must be prepared, the number of peaks must be enhanced... Thus, any PO correction in Rietveld refinement is second-best solution only. But in the daily routine work in Rietveld phase analysis, we can see that in the most cases the calculated PO correction factors are "reasonable" (reflecting the shape of the crystals, biggest faces get highest, directions inbetween lowest...), and the quantitative results are acceptable for such "realisticly oriented" powder samples what can produced by standard techniques. I believe this is an argument to apply these models, even though they are perhaps not able to decribe stronger PO or maybe unable to do a texture analysis (what is anyway impossible from a single Bragg-Brentano scan).
Greetings
Reinhard

Luca Lutterotti schrieb:

Reinhard,

I stick with what Gerard said:

"But i have no other information that supports the existence of preferred orientation"

so what information give you the confirmation it is the powder mount responsible of preferred orientation. I work almost exclusively with image plate detectors and I can assure you that the graininess problem is appearing more often than the preferred orientation case. I am working on texture mostly so I am happy when you find them, but this case is not s frequent as people think and for sure not s frequent as graininess.

I wait also confirmation from Gerard that his sample is a powder and it has plate like or fiber like particles. Otherwise I will investigate the graininess case that with a proper grinding or a spinner is easily resolvable.

Also, for who think that because the harmonic model can fit it is for sure preferred orientation. I can just suggest to work for a while with real textured sample and the harmonic and see if there is really this relationship, you may be surprise by the result.

cheers,
    Luca

On May 8, 2008, at 3:08 PM, Reinhard Kleeberg wrote:

Luca,
speaking about powder samples, Frank is right. The PO of powder mounts is seldom reproducible and the filling technique is responsible for particle orientation, depending on particle shape, filling direction, pressure... In practice it is a nice trick to repeat the filling of the powder holder with different filling techniques to look for PO. Of course, sample graininess may be also a reason for not reproducible intensity, but these effects ("rocks in the dust") ar mostly hard to correct successfully by spherical harmonics as Gerard stated for his problem. In any case, the problem sounds to be related to sample preparation.
Reinhard

Luca Lutterotti schrieb:

On May 8, 2008, at 12:30 AM, May, Frank wrote:

You can check for texture effects (preferred orientation) by obtaining multiple patterns of the material. It's realistic to expect some differences, but preferred orientation is manifest by not being able to replicate the pattern.




Not true,

preferred orientation or texture are perfectly reproducible, provided you use the same sample orientation. What is not reproducible and probably what Frank May is referring to is not preferred orientation but graininess or few big grains that do not guarantee the correct statistic. So if you need to check for graininess, you just move a little your sample, so the beam covers a different area on the sample. If you think you have texturte, to check for it you have to change the sample orientation to see a change. Beware that in a Bragg-Brentano instrument turning around the axis normal to the sample surface is not a valid change in orientation as nothing will change for texture; you have to change the sample inclination instead (omega or chi).

   Best Regards,

       Luca Lutterotti




That's the simple test.  Let us know what you find.

Another issue for "improper intensities" is when the specimen is not sufficiently wide enough at low angles (typically below 20- degrees 2- Theta with copper radiation) and the x-ray beam does not fully impinge on the specimen. The observed reflections in the low angle region will be less than calculated by a modelling program.

Frank May
Research Investigator
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
University of Missouri - St. Louis
One University Boulevard
St. Louis, Missouri  63121-4499

314-516-5098

________________________________

From: Gerard, Garcia S [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 5/7/2008 8:57 AM
To: rietveld_l@ill.fr
Subject: Preferred orientation?



Dear all,

I have a laboratory Bragg-Brentano X-ray (Cu) pattern that shows intensity mismatches only at low angles, ie 20-50 2theta or 1.8 to 4 Angstroms. There are overestimated peaks and also underestimated peaks.I have tried to discard factors that might cause this problem:

The thermal parameters look sensible. Moreover, the data at high angle looks ok, so intensity transfer from low angle to high angle or vice versa does not seem to be the cause.

Atomic positions also look sensible. And again, data at high angle looks ok. Is the scattering angle dependence of the atomic positions the same as for the thermal parameters? (I cannot remember that, but i am pretty sure it is not).

Following the advice published in J. Appl. Cryst. 32, 36 (1999), the other factor that might cause this problem is preferred orientation: I have tried to find a hkl dependence in the overestimated and underestimated peaks but i could not find any. If i try to model preferred orientation with spherical harmonics the problems disappears nicely. The problem is how to justify the existence of preferred orientation. The crystal system is orthorhombic. But i have no other information that supports the existence of preferred orientation.

Is there any other problem that I cannot think of?Is the preferred orientation correction masking any of these other problems I cannot think of?

Regards

Gerard



________________________________

Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under charity number SC000278.







Reply via email to