COMCIFS / Powder_Dictionary

CIF definitions for powder diffraction
4 stars 4 forks source link

How to define instrument radius? #34

Closed rowlesmr closed 1 year ago

rowlesmr commented 1 year ago

I've been adding PD_INSTR-related output to my TOPAS macros, and I'm a little stumped on how to define the instrument radius.

I've found: _pd_instr.dist_src_mono _pd_instr.dist_mono_spec _pd_instr.dist_src_spec _pd_instr.dist_spec_anal _pd_instr.dist_anal_detc _pd_instr.dist_spec_detc

In the example below, I can specify the distances src_mono, mono_spec, spec_anal, and anal_detc, but I can't see how that allows me to calculate the goniometer radius. image

What am I missing?

briantoby commented 1 year ago

I probably did not consider the dual monochromator case. Not very common at all for Bragg-Brentano, but very common for synchrotrons.

On Oct 8, 2022, at 8:32 AM, Matthew Rowles @.**@.>> wrote:

I've been adding PD_INSTR-related output to my TOPAS macros, and I'm a little stumped on how to define the instrument radius.

I've found: _pd_instr.dist_src_mono _pd_instr.dist_mono_spec _pd_instr.dist_src_spec _pd_instr.dist_spec_anal _pd_instr.dist_anal_detc _pd_instr.dist_spec_detc

In the example below, I can specify the distances src_mono, mono_spec, spec_anal, and anal_detc, but I can't see how that allows me to calculate the goniometer radius. [image]https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/14921460/194709714-1b2f3623-6035-4f11-b99c-30eb65a7907e.png

What am I missing?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/COMCIFS/Powder_Dictionary/issues/34, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACH7E2HYSNFORNLYU4BG6YDWCFZXRANCNFSM6AAAAAARAIJAB4. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

rowlesmr commented 1 year ago

How about this as a proposal?

image

.

you need allow both distances, as you could have a parallel or convergent beam instrument where the incident and diffracted radii are different.

jamesrhester commented 1 year ago

Is there a reference work that could be cited in the definition where these concepts are discussed? Volume H maybe even (we don't have access yet)?

rowlesmr commented 1 year ago

Yes.

Vol H, S2.1.4.1, Figs 2.1.3 & 2.1.4

Arnt has some good figures of various setups. He has labelled the relevant dimension as the "detector circle"; I know it as the "goniometer circle".

image

image

rowlesmr commented 1 year ago

Arnt also describes a a couple of optics that could be added:

jamesrhester commented 1 year ago

I think it makes sense to provide data names for the detector circle and the two virtual distances originally proposed. In the most general case it looks like these virtual distances could vary for each angle at least in Bragg-Brentano, even if most constructions hold them constant. So we could reserve the virtual distances for cases where they vary during measurement (pd_meas loop), and provide a detector circle data name for use where the two virtual distances are identical for every measurement point.

briantoby commented 1 year ago

In a Seeman-Bolin diffractometer the distances do vary to keep the focusing circle at constant curvature.

Brian

Sent from a powerful small device but with weak eyes.

On Oct 16, 2022, at 8:12 PM, James Hester @.***> wrote:



I think it makes sense to provide data names for the detector circle and the two virtual distances originally proposed. In the most general case it looks like these virtual distances could vary for each angle at least in Bragg-Brentano, even if most constructions hold them constant. So we could reserve the virtual distances for cases where they vary during measurement (pd_meas loop), and provide a detector circle data name for use where the two virtual distances are identical for every measurement point.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/COMCIFS/Powder_Dictionary/issues/34#issuecomment-1280130498, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACH7E2GC4CYPQU6RGAVTYRLWDSRYLANCNFSM6AAAAAARAIJAB4. You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.***>