On 23 Jun 2015, at 22:22, Khalifah, Peter kp...@bnl.gov wrote:
Preferred orientation results in the central assumption that the measured
intensity is proportional to the reflection structure being violated,
This is actually quite new to me as definition of preferred orientation or
better
Hi Alan,
In the limiting case of orienting all crystals in 3D you get a mosaic
single crystal (e.g. [1], or using an XFEL to measure 1 at a time). Then
the refined the crystal structure has somewhat better accuracy than with
a 1D Rietveld fit. Perhaps not the most popular idea for this
Yes, that is of course a more precise and correct answer. I did not mean to
imply that diffraction physics work differently, just that the data processing
resulted in some badly wrong assumptions about the data being used for Rietveld
refinement.
I tried to give a quick answer to a basic
Both Peter and Luca are correct :-) Preferred orientation can indeed be
used to help SOLVE (unknown) structures, but when you want to REFINE
structures you should try to eliminate systematic errors such as preferred
orientation, if possible by better sample preparation. That may not be
possible
