Hi all,

This is to say that I'm am nearly finished with the re-certification of SRM 676 for amorphous content. The revised certificate, offering a discussion as to the certification method, will be on the NIST website shortly, after the review process is completed. The certified phase purity of SRM 676 (retroactive to units in the field) is 91.75% +/- 1.5%.

Regards,

Jim

At 01:44 PM 5/6/2004 -0400, you wrote:
Robert

As previously mentioned many Rietveld programs will do what you want if
you're willing to do the amorphous content calculations by hand afterwards.
Some commercial software has it built in.
I've done work in this area, and there are some pitfalls of which you must
be aware, or your results may be VERY unreliable.

1.  microabsorption.  If your phases are similar in composition and your
'spike' phase has a similar absorption then this might not be a problem.
However, there are instances in which extreme microabsorption can make a
accurate determination practically impossible (other than possibly changing
your tube to a more friendly wavelength).  There is the Brindley correction
that can sort of correct moderate microabsorption, but you need to know your
particle size, and ideally it needs to have a narrow distribution.  Reducing
the particle size of your sample to sub-micron levels helps significantly.

2. spike phase.  Many so-called crystalline phases aren't as fully
crystalline as you might think.  The SRM676 alumina had it's amorphous
content measured a while back using neutrons and came out as 1.77 +- 0.68%.
It doesn't sound alot but can make a big difference to your final results.
Many 'crystalline' phases can be significantly higher.  Microabsorption can
be an issue with the spike so choose your spike carefully, and ideally
standardise it using SRM676.  Remember to include the error in the SRM676
amorphous content if quoting absolute amorphous contents rather than
relative amounts.

3. particle statistics.  This is equally as important when looking at purely
crystalline materials, but errors due to poor particle statistics can really
mess up amorphous content work.  Ideally, micronise your sample before
running it, but if they're nanomaterials then it might not be an issue.

4.  surface roughness.  I noticed that you probably work with nanomaterials.
They tend to be fluffy, and such samples (at least on our instrument) show
noticeable surface roughness effects on low angle reflections. If this is
the case for your samples then you will either have to correct it or densify
your sample somehow (or both).


Some of this stuff was covered in the results of the quantitative analysis round robin a while back:

Outcomes of the International Union of Crystallography Commission on Powder
Diffraction Round Robin on Quantitative Phase Analysis: samples 1a to 1h
I. C. Madsen, N. V. Y. Scarlett, L. M. D. Cranswick and T. Lwin, J. Appl.
Cryst. (2001). 34, 409-426

Outcomes of the International Union of Crystallography Commission on Powder
Diffraction Round Robin on Quantitative Phase Analysis: samples 2, 3, 4,
synthetic bauxite, natural granodiorite and pharmaceuticals
N. V. Y. Scarlett, I. C. Madsen, L. M. D. Cranswick, T. Lwin, E. Groleau, G.
Stephenson, M. Aylmore and N. Agron-Olshina
J. Appl. Cryst. (2002). 35, 383-400


It would be useful to cross-check your technique on a couple of dummy samples if at all possible to make sure you're not being mislead. Have fun!!

Pam



Dr Pamela Whitfield CChem MRSC
Energy Materials Group
Institute for Chemical Process and Environmental Technology
Building M12
National Research Council Canada
1200 Montreal Road
Ottawa  ON   K1A 0R6
CANADA
Tel: (613) 998 8462         Fax: (613) 991 2384
Email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ICPET WWW: http://icpet-itpce.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca


-----Original Message----- From: Robert Mauricot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 6, 2004 10:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Dear all,

I have a powder diffraction of an amorphous multiphase material. I want to
do a quantitative analysis of the amorphous phase.  Can anyone tell me what
software does it.

Sincery

R.mauricot


Cemes-CNRS Toulouse 31077 France Laboratoire NaNomat

James P. Cline [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ceramics Division Voice (301) 975 5793
National Institute of Standards and Technology FAX (301) 975 5334
100 Bureau Dr. stop 8520
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8523 USA




Reply via email to