A Understanding Modified Bragg's Law with Derivation and Examples

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter saybrook1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bragg's law Law
saybrook1
Messages
101
Reaction score
4
Hi guys, the x-ray data booklet gives a modified Bragg's Law that seems to be a combination of Snell's and Braggs. I'll post a picture of what this looks like. I've tried combining the two equations and coming up with their answer but can't get a solid derivation. Any help or a point toward a derivation would be awesome. Thanks!

http://imgur.com/a/CvUGz

http://imgur.com/a/CvUGz
 
Physics news on Phys.org
saybrook1 said:
Hi guys, the x-ray data booklet gives a modified Bragg's Law that seems to be a combination of Snell's and Braggs. I'll post a picture of what this looks like. I've tried combining the two equations and coming up with their answer but can't get a solid derivation. Any help or a point toward a derivation would be awesome. Thanks!

http://imgur.com/a/CvUGz

[PLAIN]http://imgur.com/a/CvUGz[/QUOTE]

I would really like to know where this correction comes from.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I get something similar, but a couple of corrections. I don't know if my calculations are correct, but I can show you what I got.
One problem with the Bragg equation is the ## \theta ## is not measured from the normal to the surface. In the following derivation, I will use ## \theta ## as from the normal, and ## \theta ' ## as measured from the surface. The index "n" is assumed to be approximately 1 but is assumed to be ## n=1+\delta ##. (This is one of two places where I don't agree completely with what they stated.) ## \\ ## Beginning with ## 2nd cos(\theta_r)=m \lambda ## for constructive interference, and using Snell's law ## n sin(\theta_r)=sin(\theta_i) ##, then ## sin(\theta_r)=sin(\theta_i)/n ##. Also ## sin(\theta_i ')=cos(\theta_i) ## which will be used momentarily. We have ## cos(\theta_r)=(1-(sin(\theta_i)/n)^2)^{1/2} ##so that ## n cos(\theta_r)=(n^2-sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=(n^2-1+1-sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=(n^2-1+cos^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=(n^2-1+sin^2(\theta_i '))^{1/2} ##Now expand with ## n^2-1=2 \delta ## (approximately)and ## sin(\theta_i ') ## being the larger term. This gives ## n cos(\theta_r)=sin(\theta_i ')(1+2 \delta/sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=sin(\theta_i ')(1+\delta/sin^2(\theta_i ') ) ##. Now we have that ## 2d sin(\theta_i ')=m \lambda ## (Bragg's law without correction).So that ## sin^2(\theta_i ')=(m \lambda)^2/(4 d^2) ## . Putting it all together: ## \\ ## $$ 2d sin(\theta_i ')(1+4 d^2 \delta/(m \lambda)^2)=m \lambda $$. I will try to proofread my response carefully, but I think I have done it correctly. Note that I get a "+" sign for the correction part, not in concurrence with the attachment in the OP.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes saybrook1
Charles Link said:
I get something similar, but a couple of corrections. I don't know if my calculations are correct, but I can show you what I got.
One problem with the Bragg equation is the ## \theta ## is not measured from the normal to the surface. In the following derivation, I will use ## \theta ## as from the normal, and ## \theta ' ## as measured from the surface. The index "n" is assumed to be approximately 1 but is assumed to be ## n=1+\delta ##. (This is one of two places where I don't agree completely with what they stated.) ## \\ ## Beginning with ## 2nd cos(\theta_r)=m \lambda ## for constructive interference, and using Snell's law ## n sin(\theta_r)=sin(\theta_i) ##, then ## sin(\theta_r)=sin(\theta_i)/n ##. Also ## sin(\theta_i ')=cos(\theta_i) ##. This gives ## cos(\theta_r)=(1-(sin(\theta_i)/n)^2)^{1/2} ##so that ## n cos(\theta_r)=(n^2-sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=(n^2-1+1-sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=(n^2-1+cos^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=(n^2-1+sin^2(\theta_i '))^{1/2} ##Now expand with ## n^2-1=2 \delta ## (approximately)and ## sin(\theta_i ') ## being the larger term. This gives ## n cos(\theta_r)=sin(\theta_i ')(1+2 \delta/sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2}=sin(\theta_i ')(1+\delta/sin^2(\theta_i ') ) ##. Now we have that ## 2d sin(\theta_i ')=m \lambda ## (Bragg's law without correction).So that ## sin^2(\theta_i ')=(m \lambda)^2/(4 d^2) ## . Putting it all together: ## \\ ## $$ 2d sin(\theta_i ')(1+4 d^2 \delta/(m \lambda)^2)=m \lambda $$. I will try to proofread my response carefully, but I think I have done it correctly. Note that I get a "+" sign for the correction part, not in concurrence with the attachment in the OP.
Oh wow, thanks a ton! This looks great.

So far I had this:

http://imgur.com/a/xJsHR

Lol not even close. This was my latest attempt at least. Tried a ton of different ways to make sense of this. I didn't consider the geometry enough.

Also, from your first form of the Bragg eqn, what happened to the 'n' term? Clearly, it's not part of the answer although I don't see where it disappears.
 
Last edited:
I edited it just a moment ago, (a minor change), but I might continue to update it if I see any additional typos, etc., so please look at my original post once more, etc.
 
  • Like
Likes saybrook1
Charles Link said:
I edited it just a moment ago, (a minor change), but I might continue to update it if I see any additional typos, etc., so please look at my original post once more, etc.

Cool, will do; Thanks again man!
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
saybrook1 said:
Oh wow, thanks a ton! This looks great.

So far I had this:

http://imgur.com/a/xJsHR

Lol not even close. This was my latest attempt at least. Tried a ton of different ways to make sense of this. I didn't consider the geometry enough.

Also, from your first form of the Bragg eqn, what happened to the 'n' term? Clearly, it's not part of the answer although I don't see where it disappears.
The "n " term is multiplying ## cos(\theta_r) ##. It multiplied the parenthesis of ## (1-sin^2(\theta_i)/n^2)^{1/2} ## to give ## (n^2-sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2} ##.
 
  • Like
Likes saybrook1
Charles Link said:
The "n " term is multiplying ## cos(\theta_r) ##. It multiplied the parenthesis of ## (1-sin^2(\theta_i)/n^2)^{1/2} ## to give ## (n^2-sin^2(\theta_i))^{1/2} ##.

I see. Great! I'll try to talk to someone about the sign discrepancy... it's listed other places with the negative sign as well.
 
I think the sign error comes from the original form of Braggs law used. I think if we start with $$m\lambda=2nd\sin(\theta_r)$$ then we can remedy the sign error.
 
  • #10
saybrook1 said:
I see. Great! I'll try to talk to someone about the sign discrepancy... it's listed other places with the negative sign as well.
My equations assume a constructive interference between each of the atomic layers throughout the material. I think I did it correctly. If I got a wrong sign for some reason, it wouldn't be the first time. I'm assuming a positive correction ## \delta ## for the refractive index...
 
  • #11
Charles Link said:
My equations assume a constructive interference between each of the atomic layers throughout the material. I think I did it correctly. If I got a wrong sign for some reason, it wouldn't be the first time. I'm assuming a positive correction ## \delta ## for the refractive index...

Ahhh okay, fair enough.
 
  • #12
saybrook1 said:
Ahhh okay, fair enough.
A google just now, I think, supplies the answer. The article stated, in talking about x-rays, that the index of refraction is just slightly less than 1. Thereby they are using a positive ## \delta ## in your textbook, but use the definition ## n=1-\delta ##. Looks like we are now in concurrence with the textbook result. :-) :-)
 
  • Like
Likes saybrook1
  • #13
Charles Link said:
A google just now, I think, supplies the answer. The article stated, in talking about x-rays, that the index of refraction is just slightly less than 1. Thereby they are using a positive ## \delta ## in your textbook, but use the definition ## n=1-\delta ##. Looks like we are now in concurrence with the textbook result. :-) :-)
Beautiful, so then we can say $$n^2-1\approx-2\delta$$ Do I have that right? Then we'll get the negative sign in the expansion. Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Back
Top