Hi,

Any chance of a Cr6+ contaminant? The very pronounced pre-edge feature of
Cr6+ in chromate
appears to align well with the second feature in Cr3+ (Cr2O3). If that
contaminant is being reduced
in the beam, that might explain what you are seeing.

e.g. 
https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://www2.ung.si/*arcon/_borders/xas/xanes/xanes.htm__;fg!!G_uCfscf7eWS!Z4Fuo27w3E3LSMjq5mTa8j6CnnXHgficBY4OO-XWOXw1wu8MYNM-ayFo5L_mrHRyzl-Mn0ZSomMyQ3TbGxsphs4Qn0idEluu0D8K2aE$
 

-R.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 5:30 AM Rachel Pepper via Ifeffit <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi everyone, I’ve got some XAS data at the Cr K edge for Cr-doped alumina
> (i. e. ruby) powder samples (Cr 0. 1-1 atomic%) where we are seeing a
> reduction in one of the pre-edge peaks with replicate scans. There are
> three sets of samples;
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
> This Message Is From an External Sender
> This message came from outside your organization.
>
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> I’ve got some XAS data at the Cr K edge for Cr-doped alumina (i.e. ruby)
> powder samples (Cr 0.1-1 atomic%) where we are seeing a reduction in one of
> the pre-edge peaks with replicate scans. There are three sets of samples;
> each made by a different synthetic method.
>
>
>
> We did do the repeat scans on the same spot on the samples and noted this
> change after the data was collected, which means that the change might be a
> result of beam damage. However, the results are odd because:
>
>    1. The reduction in intensity is consistent across different Cr
>    concentrations for samples made by the same method, but is not observed for
>    all preparation methods
>    2. The XAFS does not show the same systematic variation with replicate
>    scans which suggests that this change in the pre edge is not due to a
>    structural change
>    3. The edge position doesn’t change with repeat scans
>    4. We have compositional data for these samples, and there are no
>    significant impurities
>    5. I’ve worked up the XAFS data in Artemis and there doesn’t seem to
>    be significant differences in the structures of the samples prepared by the
>    three different methods. For all methods, it looks like there is a second
>    Cr atom in the second coordination shell, which is also supported by
>    luminescence data.
>
>
>
> I’ve looked online and found a computational study where intensity
> differences in ruby samples may be related to electron spin (doi:
> 10.1238/Physica.Topical.115a00191, doi: 10.1039/b926499j), but I’m not
> sure if this is a sensible explanation – I’m still quite new to this
> technique.
>
> Has anyone come across anything similar, or does anyone know why we might
> have seen this in our samples?
>
> I’ve attached some images of the pre-edge and XAFS regions for the scans
> to illustrate what I’m asking about.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Rachel
> ifeffit mailing list:
> https://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman3/lists/ifeffit.millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/
>  
> to unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected]
>
ifeffit mailing list:  
https://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman3/lists/ifeffit.millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/
to unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected]

Reply via email to