view article
Figure 3
(a) Parameterization of IP (FWHM and η) from the data in Fig. 2[link](a). Refined coefficients for the 6CuKα laboratory instrument (Fig. 2[link]a) are W = 5.906369 × 10−3, V = −2.502974 × 10−3, U = 3.712228 × 10−3, a = 3.107787 × 10−1, b = 6.175673 × 10−3, c = 0. The lower line is the tanθ polynomial correcting aberrations on peak position [equation (4)[link]] (Wilson, 1963BB44), with refined parameters a−1 = −5.978103 × 10−4, a0 = 1.437456 × 10−2, a1 = −9.797414 × 10−3, a2 = 0, a3 = 2.635631 × 10−4. (b) The same analysis is made for the pattern in Fig. 2[link](b), 43ID22 with 31 keV radiation, showing a much narrower IP than in (a), and nearly negligible peak position correction; the inset shows data with a ×10 expansion of left ordinate axis. For most instruments η varies linearly with θ, as in the cases in this figure, or is even constant as for SR data. See supporting information for results for all instruments in this study.

Journal logoJOURNAL OF
APPLIED
CRYSTALLOGRAPHY
ISSN: 1600-5767
Volume 51| Part 3| June 2018| Pages 831-843
https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576718005411
Follow J. Appl. Cryst.
Sign up for e-alerts
E-alerts
Follow J. Appl. Cryst. on Twitter
Twitter
Follow us on facebook
Facebook
Sign up for RSS feeds
RSS