Dear professor Evans, Thank you so much for all the videos. Specifically, this video has helped me to distinguish that when using the FP approach, the TCHZ command line shouldn't be used (I would have kept it even after introducing the LVol_FWHM_CS_G_L and e0_from_Strain) - maybe an obvious fact, but I missed to get it before seeing this video. Kind regards, Djurdjija
@abiodunoshinowo2702 Жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for your awesome explanations. You are a great professor! 3:57 How were Radius (217), Divergence (1) axial_conv (filament_length 12, sample_length 15, receiving_slit_length 12, primary_soller_angle 5.1, secondary_soller_angle 5) and slit_width (0.1) added before refinement? 4:55 Also how were LVol_FWHM_CS_G_L (1, 4489.51014, 0.89, 5424.90744, !csgc, 10000, ...) and e0_from_strain (3.57919248e-07, !sgc, 0.0001, !sls, 0.0001) added before refinement? I don't usually see these contributions each time I do refinement for my samples. Could that be because my particle sizes are in submicrons?
@johnevansstructuralscience4018
Жыл бұрын
Best place for topas questions is: topas.awh.durham.ac.uk/flarum/public/. In general the instrument parameters would be known for your instrument, or you might determine them using a standard material. The starting values in the size/strain macros are arbitrary. I would typically start e.g. sgc and slc at small numbers (0.0001) and refine. Other quantities in the macro are fixed or reported after refinement. If your sample contribution to the peak shape is much lower than the instrument (large domains, small strain and low resolution instrument) then the instrument contributions would dominate.
Пікірлер: 3
Dear professor Evans, Thank you so much for all the videos. Specifically, this video has helped me to distinguish that when using the FP approach, the TCHZ command line shouldn't be used (I would have kept it even after introducing the LVol_FWHM_CS_G_L and e0_from_Strain) - maybe an obvious fact, but I missed to get it before seeing this video. Kind regards, Djurdjija
Thank you so much for your awesome explanations. You are a great professor! 3:57 How were Radius (217), Divergence (1) axial_conv (filament_length 12, sample_length 15, receiving_slit_length 12, primary_soller_angle 5.1, secondary_soller_angle 5) and slit_width (0.1) added before refinement? 4:55 Also how were LVol_FWHM_CS_G_L (1, 4489.51014, 0.89, 5424.90744, !csgc, 10000, ...) and e0_from_strain (3.57919248e-07, !sgc, 0.0001, !sls, 0.0001) added before refinement? I don't usually see these contributions each time I do refinement for my samples. Could that be because my particle sizes are in submicrons?
@johnevansstructuralscience4018
Жыл бұрын
Best place for topas questions is: topas.awh.durham.ac.uk/flarum/public/. In general the instrument parameters would be known for your instrument, or you might determine them using a standard material. The starting values in the size/strain macros are arbitrary. I would typically start e.g. sgc and slc at small numbers (0.0001) and refine. Other quantities in the macro are fixed or reported after refinement. If your sample contribution to the peak shape is much lower than the instrument (large domains, small strain and low resolution instrument) then the instrument contributions would dominate.