Diffraction Question: 0 in 1st Place on Planes Normal to Beam

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Coffee_
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diffraction
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the phenomenon of diffraction in crystal structures, specifically addressing the behavior of diffraction patterns when a beam is directed parallel to certain planes in a crystal. Participants explore the implications of having planes with a zero index in one direction and the conditions under which diffraction occurs, considering various crystal types and the role of reciprocal lattices.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a scenario involving a cuboid unit cell with atoms at the vertices and in the center, questioning how diffraction can occur on planes that are parallel to the incoming beam direction.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on whether the diffracting planes are edge-on to the incoming beam, suggesting that this may be a source of confusion.
  • Concerns are raised about the requirement of an angle between the beam and the planes for diffraction to occur, with references to exercises and software that indicate the presence of certain diffraction points.
  • One participant suggests that the discussion may involve a centered cubic lattice, noting that the primitive cell's basis vectors do not align with the cubic vectors being considered.
  • There is a mention of the reciprocal lattice of a body-centered cubic (bcc) lattice being a face-centered cubic (fcc) lattice, which introduces complexity regarding the relationship between direct and reciprocal lattice vectors.
  • Participants express confusion about the implications of diffraction patterns observed in various crystal structures, particularly in relation to the orientation of the incident beam and the indexed planes.
  • One participant shares a reference to a slide that illustrates diffraction patterns, highlighting the presence of diffraction dots for planes parallel to the beam direction, which raises further questions about the underlying principles.
  • Another participant notes that this phenomenon may be specific to electron microscopy, where the thinness of samples leads to broadening of the angular distribution of scattered light, allowing for reflection even when the beam is parallel to the planes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of confusion and uncertainty regarding the conditions for diffraction, with no consensus reached on the implications of the observed diffraction patterns. Multiple competing views and interpretations of the diffraction process are present.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific exercises and software outputs that may not fully account for all assumptions or conditions relevant to the discussion, leading to unresolved questions about the nature of the diffraction patterns observed.

Coffee_
Messages
259
Reaction score
2
Take a cuboid unit cell structure where we put an atom on each of the vertices and a different atom in the center. We have a single crystal of that material.

Now take one of the cuboid axes to be the ''a'' basis vector. We send in a diffraction beam parallel to that direction. On the other side we will see a diffraction pattern that corresponds to the reciprocal lattice. If we identify each point of this lattice to a set of planes we will find that all these points share on thing. They have ''0'' on the first place. So things like (002).

This is according to one of the exercises I have made. However I have a conceptual question - a plane having a vector with a zero on the first place means that the normal vector of this plane always perpendicular to ''a'' or the direction of the incoming beam here. How can you have diffraction happening on planes that are parallel to the incoming beam? In Bragg law you need to always have an angle between the planes and the incoming beam. I'm clearly misunderstanding something big here so please some help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are saying that the diffracting planes are those which are edge-on to the incoming beam?
 
If by edge-on you mean that from the viewpoint of the beam all you see of the plane is a line, then yes. That's not the claim I'm trying to defend, I'm baffled by it myself but that is indeed how it seems to be from the exercises I've checked and the program CrystalDiffract if you kow it. So my confusion lies in the fact that I thought that to diffract and angle was supposed to exist between the beam and the planes. However if I send a beam in from the ''a'' direction in an orthorhombic crystal, and then index the diffraction pattern, the program I mentioned - or exercises in class seem to indicate that points like (0,k,l) are present in the pattern. As you see (0,k,l) planes lie edge-on to the incoming beam here so how can they diffract.
 
One guess: You are talking about a centered cubic lattice. The primitive cell which contains only one atom has its basis vectors not coinciding with the cubic vectors you are considering.
 
By your answer I judge that what I'm describing is considered odd, right? That normally this shouldn't be the case?
 
I can see why that is the case for monoclinic or triclinic structures but I was solely dealing with ortho/tetra/cubic crystals.
 
Just try to draw a primitive unit cell (i.e. one which contains only one atom). Is this cell rectangular?
 
In general it obviously depends, but in my case yes, the cell would be rectangular and I would place one atom at each of the 8 vertices of the cell. This is equivalent to containing one atom since each one counts for 1/8 at the vertices I guess.
 
  • #10
Ah, I just saw that you wrote "a different atom in the center". So you are not talking about a body centered lattice.
 
  • #11
Oh no that was not my intention. That was actually not even needed, for my understanding it would be enough to discuss a cubic primitive cell.
 
  • #12
For a primitive cubic cell I don't understand it either!
 
  • #13
Example of what I mean:

http://www.slideshare.net/johader/winterworkshop-diffractie

Check slide 7 first picture,

The direction of the beam seems to be [001]. However there are diffraction dots present of planes that are parallel with the beam direction! Very strange. This is what I encountered in exercises and in the program (CrystalDiffract) for cubic,orthorhombic,tetagonal primitive stuff.
 
  • #14
I would have taken [001] to mean that just to be the view along that direction on the reciprocal lattice. This does not mean that there is any ray incident along this direction.
 
  • #15
Now I'm quite confused, could you elaborate?
 
  • #17
So this is peculiar to electron microscopy where samples are very thin. The finite size of the crystal leads to a broadening of the angular distribution of the scattered light so that even for incidence parallel to the planes, reflection can be observed.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Understanding Ewald's sphere in the context of X-Ray diffraction
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Undergrad Why the reflected angle is the same as incident in x-ray diffraction?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Undergrad Van Laue Formulation: X-ray Diffraction from Crystal Structure
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Graduate Diffraction on periodic Structures
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
Graduate What Are the Key Insights on Bragg/von Lau Scattering in X-Ray Experiments?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Graduate Inquiry regarding Ashcroft and Mermin's page 365
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad The missing factor of 2π in reciprocal lattice calculations
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad Questions About Bragg's Law of X-Ray Diffraction
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
11K
Graduate Miller Indices of Simple Cubic Lattice
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
Graduate How does x-ray diffraction from different Bragg planes add up?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K