Give me 10 min.
-----Original Message----- From: Davor Balzar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 4:45 PM To: [email protected] Dear Leonid: Yes, but on real data: Journal of Applied Crystallography 35 (2002) 338-346 (the paper is available from the Web site below). Two examples are reported; in the second, the Voigt approximation failed due to an extremely broad size distribution (or bimodal distribution). However, Voigt size-broadened profile should work for most real-world samples. The paper shows that either pseudo-Voigt or Voigt are good approximations for both ("moderately" broad) lognormal and (any physical) gamma size distribution of spherical crystallites. Davor ************************************ Davor Balzar Department of Physics & Astronomy University of Denver 2112 E Wesley Ave Denver, CO 80208 Phone: 303-871-2137 Fax: 303-871-4405 Web: www.du.edu/~balzar ************************************ > -----Original Message----- > From: Leonid Solovyov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 12:49 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Size Strain In GSAS > > On Friday 03/25 Davor Balzar wrote: > > Paragraph 3.3 of the article that you mentioned explains how were > >size and strain values calculated. One can even obtain size > > distribution by following the procedure that was posted to this > > mailing list several months ago; > > Dear Davor, > > Your recipe for estimating size distribution from the parameters of a > Voight-fitted profile is clear and straightforward, but I wonder have > you, or someone else, tested it on, say, simulated data for the model > of spherical crystallites having lognormal size distribution with > various dispersions? > > Best regards, > Leonid > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Make Yahoo! your home page > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs >
