Dear Prof. Bergmann, Thank you for your reply. Yes, it is true that the strain field solutions from a Stephens model parameters are not unique.
But still can we use the 3D-Anisotropic strain field plot obatined using the Stephens model parameter as the representative plot of the nature of strain field within the sample? Thanking you. With best regards, Apu ----- Original Message ----- From: Joerg Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, October 27, 2006 7:10 pm Subject: Re: GSAS: Stephens Model > Dear Apu, > > maybe, there is some physical meaning. But, in general, the strain > fieldsolutions from a Stephens model parameters are not unique. > Stephens model has up to 15 parameters (triclinic), and the > correlation matrice of the lattice parameters has up to 21 > parameters (triclinic). One cannot determine 21 unique numbers > from 15 parameters, in general. > > Regards > > Joerg Bergmann, Dresden > > Am Freitag, den 27.10.2006, 16:33 +0500 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > Dear All, > > I am carying out Rietveld refinement of a deformed > polycrystalline sample. WH plot shows anisotropic broadening of > the profile. If I incorporate Stephens Model in GSAS, it improves > the quality of the fit. > > > > Now my question is: > > > > In this case if I use the refined parameters (of Stephens > model)to draw the 3D-anisotropic strain field within the sample, > does it carry any physical meaning! > > > > Thanking you. > > > > With best regards, > > Apu > > > > > > > > > > > > >
