A Scherrer Formula and interpreting values

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter erbilsilik
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
erbilsilik
Messages
19
Reaction score
2
I have developed a script in MATLAB that can detect peaks from datas and that can find FWHM of detected peaks. Scripts gives reliable results but crystallites sizes are different a little from this http://mahendrakoppolu.blogspot.com.tr/2013/07/online-crystallite-size-calculator.html

Link to my data: http://pastebin.com/Ut9YgKGs

Generated physical properties from MATLAB: http://pastebin.com/K0uEZ6Mr

I made all conversion, degree to rad. The problem is that I don't have enough crystallography background to interpret the data. So how can I be sure from the values?

Check also this if you are interested in script.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
erbilsilik said:
I have developed a script in MATLAB that can detect peaks from datas and that can find FWHM of detected peaks. Scripts gives reliable results but crystallites sizes are different a little from this http://mahendrakoppolu.blogspot.com.tr/2013/07/online-crystallite-size-calculator.html

Link to my data: http://pastebin.com/Ut9YgKGs

Generated physical properties from MATLAB: http://pastebin.com/K0uEZ6Mr

I made all conversion, degree to rad. The problem is that I don't have enough crystallography background to interpret the data. So how can I be sure from the values?

Check also this if you are interested in script.
Dear OP.
The difference between the calculator and your determination can be:
1. Strain/stress peak broadening.
2. Orientation.
3. grain geometry.
4. Superposition of different phases.
5. Non-Gaussian peak profile.
6. Different geometric constant.
7. Improper baseline subtraction.
8. Improper internal shift corrections.
9. Different instrumental broadening.

In case you are interested please refer to Retrieved mailing list.
There is freeware available that can help in determinate grain size like Fityk.
You can visit also CCP14 (sends for computational crystallography) where you can accesses to many software, shareware, freewares and applications.

Goodluck
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...
Back
Top