Dear all,
Thanks for the insights.
Cheers,
Aaron
--
Dr. Aaron Finke
Postdoctoral Fellow
Swiss Light Source
WSLA/217
CH-5232 Villigen-PSI
phone: +41 56 310 5652
e-mail: aaron.fi...@psi.ch
On Mar 3, 2015, at 18:43, George Sheldrick wrote:
> Dear Finke,
>
Dear Finke,
SADABS and similar programs work best when given scans about several
axes relative to the crystal. Scanning about a single axis can do more
harm than good especially if the symmetry is low. SADABS can also do a
face-indexed numerical absorption correction too, but this assumes that
Dear comrades,
This is slightly off-topic but there are enough experts here to warrant asking.
Here at SLS I occasionally get asked to collect small molecule data on the
synchrotron. By convention, post-refinement corrections for X-ray absorption by
the crystal are required for publication in A
Hi, everyone
I have a question about HKL2000. During scaling, there is a check
option call absorption correction. I processed the data with and
without it checked. With absorption correction checked, my chisq. anomalous is
more than 2.0 for all resolution shells. When I leave it out, chisq.
anomal
Lots of things change with wavelength and absorption is one of the more
prominent ones, but in the end its all just path lengths and Beer's law,
so the exact answer depends on the geometry. For example, if you are
talking about a flat detector 200 mm from the crystal, then 2 A spots
with 1 A
Hello All,
I did diffraction with the exact same sample at 1 Å and at 1.54 Å and
noticed that the higher-resolution data from the 1 Å source is more
intense relative to the 1.54 Å source after normalizing cumulative
intensity between the two data sets. Is this effect from air
absorption o
Hi, everyone
I have a question about HKL2000 too. During scaling, there is a check
option call absorption correction. I processed the data with and
without it checked. With absorption correction checked, my rejection
file is only 0.4%. When I leave it out, the rejection file is 0.8%.
I read throu
