Jilin

As far as I'm aware there is no repository for Topas str files.  Bruker does
sell a (fairly) comprehensive set for those without the time or inclination
to make their own.  Topas will import CIF files, but the ICSD doesn't always
export CIF files in the same format as Topas is expecting.  Consequently you
sometimes have to edit the CIF file by hand.  Sounds tedious but it's better
than typing in a 100+ atom cell by hand!  I suppose someone could create
such a repository, but some mineral structures do vary somewhat
(occasionally alarmingly so) in the literature and I would be wary of saying
that the one I use is the 'correct' one.

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: Jilin Zhang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: June 4, 2004 9:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Dear Dr. Whitfield:

It appears to me you are using koalariet or topas by Dr. Coehlo et al. Do
you know a web site where we can down load  a bunch of .str files for
minerals, as BGMN.de has the .str files for BGMN.

Thanks.

jilin zhang
omni labs
8845 fallbrook
houston tx 77064
phone 832-237-4000

-----Original Message-----
From: Whitfield, Pamela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 8:15 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'


Nandini

The best people to reply on behalf of fundamental parameters would be Alan
Coehlo or Arnt Kern.   
But until they do here goes....

The more general form is convolution-based profile fitting.  This can be
used for all peak profile types, whereas 'pure' fundamental parameters has
only been inmplemented for the simple Bragg-Brentano case (no
monochromators).  Other geometries have to be empirically modelled using a
standard and some sort of user-defined convolution on top of the source
profile.  Better fits can often be obtained using this type of fitting than
the normal pseudo-Voigt or Pearson VII functions (in my experience at
least).  Where convolution-based fitting really comes into its own in in
complex quantitative Rietveld analysis where the number of refined variables
would become untenable for normal peak fitting.  Using convolution-based
fitting it is possible to cope with upwards of 10 phases with severe peak
overlap and still get good results with good stability. For example,
quantitative Rietveld analysis of cements is becoming routine.

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: Nandini Devi Radhamonyamma [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: June 4, 2004 6:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Dear All,


Is the fundamental parameter approach better than
mathematical approach used in most of the Rietveld
refinement programs? Does that mean programs which use
that approach are better? Any suggestions?

Nandini


        
                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 

Reply via email to