Re: [Ifeffit] Hard tests failed in fovrg

2009-01-30 Thread Bruce Ravel
On Friday 30 January 2009 08:49:36 am tony vitova wrote:
 Hi all,
  
 I am trying to fit Eu L3 edge EXAFS data of Eu complex whose structure is
 known (hopefully correct). The default feff6l in Artemis reports an error
  “Hard tests failed in fovrg. Muffin-tin radius may be too large;
 coordination number too small“. When I run feff8.2, this error exchanges
 with the following message “The phase shift correction is accurate to
 k=19”. I guess that this is not a problem, because my data is until k equal
 12 A^-1. However, the fit of the first shell (9O/9N) gives Eo equal to 13,
 which is unrealistic. This fit with paths calculated with feff6l gives
 reasonable Eo value. But the phase shifts seem to be calculated
 incorrectly. I will be very thankful for any hint! Thanks in advance

Tonya,

A quit bit of googling turned up this useful mailing list post from
John Rehr from a couple of years ago about the Hard test fail thing
in feff6:

http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/pipermail/ifeffit/2005-October/002080.html

That doesn't answer your question about feff8 however.  John or one of
his students would be better able to address that, however one might
be concerned that Feff has made a bad choice about which electrons to
consider as core electrons and which to consider as valence
electrons.  A bad choice there could confuse teh self-consistency
calculation.

I think the bottom line is whether the rest of the results besides E0
make physical sense

B


-- 

 Bruce Ravel   bra...@bnl.gov

 National Institute of Standards and Technology
 Synchrotron Methods Group at NSLS --- Beamlines U7A, X24A, X23A2
 Building 535A
 Upton NY, 11973

 My homepage:http://xafs.org/BruceRavel
 EXAFS software: http://cars9.uchicago.edu/~ravel/software/exafs/


___
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit


Re: [Ifeffit] Hard tests failed in fovrg

2009-01-30 Thread John J. Rehr

Hi Everyone,

 If you ever encounter problems like this, please attach a feff.inp
so we and others can duplicate and troubleshoot the problem. Thanks.

 Cheers,
 John


known (hopefully correct). The default feff6l in Artemis reports an error
?Hard tests failed in fovrg. Muffin-tin radius may be too large;
coordination number too small???. When I run feff8.2, this error exchanges
with the following message ???The phase shift correction is accurate to
k=19???. I guess that this is not a problem, because my data is until k equal
12 A^-1. However, the fit of the first shell (9O/9N) gives Eo equal to 13,
which is unrealistic. This fit with paths calculated with feff6l gives
reasonable Eo value. But the phase shifts seem to be calculated
incorrectly. I will be very thankful for any hint! Thanks in advance___
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit