Hi,
Self Citation: NIST Standard Reference Materials for
Characterization of Instrument Performance Industrial Applications
of X-ray Diffraction Ed by F. H. Chung D. K. Smith, pp 903-917. A
pdf is available; email to request.
In this I outline how I use SRM 660 (it was 660 in 2000, then
Hi all,
Please prepare for a shameless plug for the newly certified NIST SRM
676a:
In order to measure amorphous content (via non-PDF diffraction methods)
one needs two things: 1) An unbiased diffraction method for measurement
of phase abundance (laughter please) and 2) A standard of known phase
Hi all,
We have a newly created position for an individual to work with us on
the certification of NIST Standard Reference Materials for powder and
thin film diffraction and reflectometry methods. The desired
background is one with theoretical leanings and competence in
programing and data
Hi all,
We expect to have SRMs 640d 660b available by no later then November 2008.
SRM 676a will available in a ~month.
I regret the difficulty that is being caused by this lapse; we are
taking measures to prevent them from recurring.
Regards,
Jim
At 09:50 PM 11/15/2007, you wrote:
Hi
Hi All, David,
SRM 676a will be available this fall. It is of similar
microstructure to SRM 676 and is certified with respect to phase
purity. It is, however, at 99%, of much higher purity than SRM 676.
Regards,
Jim
At 02:48 PM 8/21/2007, you wrote:
Hi All,
I'm looking for a source
Hi,
The temperature issue is one that I have been made to suffer on numerous
occasions. My operation was moved to the new NIST Advanced Measurement
Laboratory that, among other things, features temperature control, in May
of 2004. The parallel beam diffractometer, from which future
Arie,
Bob Cheary developed the required description/equations for the use of a
psd. But I don't know that they have been implemented in any of the
available FPA codes, except perhaps Topas in launch mode.
Alan??? Are you listening?
Regards,
Jim
At 06:48 AM 5/2/2005, you wrote:
Dear
Indeed...
A situation not without some complications.
Jim
At 08:00 AM 5/2/2005, you wrote:
Alan??? Are you listening?
Bruker providing help to analyze Panalytical data ?-).
Armel
James P. Cline [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ceramics Division Voice (301)
Laurel,
At 09:13 AM 5/2/2005, you wrote:
Hi,
Alan Coelho helped us get our instrument parameter file set up for Topas
Academic. We use an X'celerator detector with cobalt radiation (no
monochromator) for most of our work.
Here is an example file:
xdd test.dat
CoKa7_Holzer(0.001)
Arie,
Yes; Bruker has an interest in this matter.
Jim
At 09:37 AM 5/2/2005, you wrote:
Bruker's Vantex detector is rather similar to PanAnalytical's
X'celerator detector from a fundamental parameters point of view,
not? Maybe I should have formulated my question differently
Is there anybody who
Research Fellow,
S.N.Bose.National Centre for Basic Sciences,
Block-JD, Sector-3, Salt Lake,
Kolkata, Pin: 700 098.
Phone no: 033 23355705/6/7/8 Extn: 404, 104, 301.
+++
-- Original Message ---
From: Jim Cline [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi,
In response to some of this post:
There was a move by a bunch of us in the ICDD to hold a profile fitting
round robin ( which I think would by quite useful ). But it died
when we realized the prodigious level of resources that would be required
to make sense of the rather large matrix of data
Hi all,
Well, I thought I'd weigh in on this with a discussion of an aforementioned
SRM project:
We are in the final stages of preparing an SRM for determination of
crystallite size from line profile analysis. Through the course of his PhD
work and NIST postdoctoral position, Nick Armstrong
Hi,
Nick Armstrong has advised me he will in non-email-land for a week or so.
I'm sure he'll resume this discussion when he returns...
Jim
At 03:45 PM 3/28/2005 +0400, you wrote:
Hi,
So, to resume your statements, by using Bayesian/Max.Entr. we can
distinguish between two distributions that can
Hi,
I wrote an article [ that appeared in Dean Smith's book ] some time back
that describes how to use SRM 660a, LaB6, and the TCH function of GSAS for
characterization of the IPF, and then refine the only the microstructure
specific terms for an estimation of the size and strain in subsequent
Hi all,
Its getting to the point that 75% of the posts on this list are requests
for structures and articles???
Inappropriate.
Jim
At 11:33 AM 3/23/2005 +0530, you wrote:
Dear all,
Can anyone please send me the following article.
snip
James P. Cline [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
At 02:09 PM 12/7/2004 +, you wrote:
Dear Stephen,
I have prepared XPD-standard Y2O3 by firing Y2O3 (99.999) from Aldrich
at 1200 ÂșC for 72 hs. (as done in 41-1105 PDF card).
I would also like to ask the other list members if anyone has calibrated
the size-strain broadening of Y2O3
Hi,
At 08:38 AM 9/10/2004 +0200, you wrote:
Hello Andreas,
When I met Jim Cline at the Denver Conference he spoke about
a fluid to drop into a (possibly backloaded) powder sample in order to
make it solid. I will not put Jim's e-mail address on the Rietveld list
but am quite sure he
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
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: Jim Cline
Joerg,
At 07:07 AM 3/7/01 +, you wrote:
snip
We have done some investigations on the old line standard LaB6 SRM660,
it contains some minor phases (sum 5%), one was LaAlO3. The new
standard SRM660a is clean and has some other advantages, too. Now,
we favour SRM660a over Y2O3.
This is a
At 04:42 PM 9/29/00 +0200, you wrote:
Jim wrote:
The hydrostatic stress level is inversely
proportional to the radius of curvature of the particles. Therefore, the
Exactly, how did you determine the trend? Have you measured the cell
parameters for different granulometries?
This view of the
Hi all,
This is to indicate that NIST SRMs 640c, silicon powder, and 660a,
lanthanum hexaboride powder, are available from the NIST SRM Program sales
office. These SRMs are certified with respect to lattice parameter at the
part-per-million level. Considerable effort has been expended to
Hi,
At 08:46 AM 7/7/00 +0100, Joe Hriljac wrote:
When we faced the same decision (well, only one machine, UK oil money does
snip
I agree with Joe: I have a D500 with a Ge monochromator and a PSD. I don't
like the metal wire PSD as much as the quartz wire one as it imparts noise
to the data
Hi,
At 05:26 PM 4/17/00 +0200, you wrote:
Dear All,
I would like to add the following question concerning the standard Si powder.
Is there someone who has information on the grain size of the 640b Si
material ?
snip
The mean particle size of SRM 640b, via laser scattering, is 7.3
microns.
Hi,
At 07:31 PM 4/1/00 +0200, you wrote:
I'm looking forward for many discussions!
Yep!
I have some naive questions :
I would like to hear exactly what is on my powder pattern:
- Kalpha3
- tube tails
or both ??
The paper by G. H"olzer et al. (Phys. Rev. A 56 (1997) pp.
Hi,
Verification
of tube tails with a single crystal experiment has been obtained: I
called Keith Bowen of Bede on this thread as I thought he would be
interested in this matter and I know he is knowledgeable on electron beam
focusing. [See the Bede web site and look for Microsource.]
He pointed
Hi,
At 04:07 PM 3/28/00 +0100, you wrote:
Hi all,
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:13:11 +0200, Armel Le Bail wrote:
I have a related question about the so-called Kalpha3.
Trying to take account of it, I only obtain some slight
increase
in the Rp and Rwp, though the fit seems to have improved,
at first
Hello,
At 09:20 PM 3/28/00 +0200, you wrote:
On the point of view of theory, can the tube-tails and
Kalpha3 satellite explanations be reconciled ? No tube-tails
theory in the most recent X-ray powder Diffractometry book
from Jenkins and Snyder, only Kalpha1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
Don't think so;
Hello II,
At 09:20 PM 3/28/00 +0200, you wrote:
On the point of view of theory, can the tube-tails and
Kalpha3 satellite explanations be reconciled ? No tube-tails
theory in the most recent X-ray powder Diffractometry book
from Jenkins and Snyder, only Kalpha1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
I went back to the
Hi,
At 12:27 PM 11/9/98 +1100, you wrote:
At 05:24 PM 03-11-98 -0500, you wrote:
At 08:26 PM 11/2/98 EST, you wrote:
Hi,
My questions pertain to refining the profile coefficients. What order do
snip1
Thanks
MIZ
Dear MIZ,
The question sounds
31 matches
Mail list logo