The only advantage I see with a variable slit is that you keep a
constant area on the surface. This
gives a constant sampling volume for samples that are thin compared to
the x-ray penetration depth.
In contrast, the sampling volume is fixed with a thick sample and
fixed slit for typical powder samples.
I agree that the variation in resolution with angle makes Reitveld
analysis much harder. A full fundamental
parameter analysis software that includes the variable slit might work.
David Lee, Ph.D.
DTLee Scientific, llc
http://www.dtlee.com
614-562-6230
On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:03 PM, Russ Field wrote:
HI All
I am seeking opinion on the installation of automated slits on a
Panalytical MPD
Pros and cons.
Comments from a previous post are shown below by an esteemed colleague
I see little use for varable divergence slits for all sorts of
reasons (firstly as there is no rock solid conversion from
automatic to fixed intensities, secondly the resolution changes with
angle with variable slits that can't be modelled
unless a more sofisticated model than that of Highcore Plus
is used).
Regards
Russell
Russell Field BSc (Hons),
Scientific Officer,
Dept of Physical Geography,
Macquarie University,
NSW 2019
==============================
Ph: 02 9850 8341
Fax: 02 9850 8420
Mobile No. 0417 681 959
Email: rfi...@els.mq.edu.au
