Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:53:41.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Certification of Standard Reference Material 660B

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2012

David R. Black ,
Donald Windover ,
Albert Henins ,
James Filliben  and
James P. Cline
David R. Black*
Affiliation:
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
Donald Windover
Affiliation:
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
Albert Henins
Affiliation:
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
James Filliben
Affiliation:
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
James P. Cline
Affiliation:
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
*
a)Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This report describes SRM 660b, the third generation of this powder diffraction SRM used primarily for determination of the instrument profile function (IPF). It is certified with respect to unit-cell parameter. It consists of approximately 6 g LaB6 powder prepared using a 11B isotopically enriched precursor material so as to render the SRM applicable to the neutron diffraction community. The microstructure of the LaB6 powder was engineered to produce a crystallite size above that where size broadening is typically observed and to minimize the crystallographic defects that lead to strain broadening. A NIST -built diffractometer, incorporating many advanced design features, was used to certify the unit-cell parameter of the LaB6 powder. Both type A, statistical, and type B, systematic, errors have been assigned to yield a certified value for the unit-cell parameter of a=0.415691(8) nm at 22.5°C.

Keywords

standard reference materialX-ray diffractioncertificationunit-cell parameterdiffractometer
Type
Technical Articles
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 26 , Special Issue 2 , June 2011 , pp. 155 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bergmann, J., Kleeberg, R., Haase, A., and Breidenstein, B. (2000). “Advanced fundamental parameters model for improved profile analysis,” Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Residual Stresses, edited by Böttger, A. J., Delhez, R., and Mittemeijer, E. J. (Trans Tech, Zürich-Uetikon, Switzerland), Vols. 347–349, pp. 303–308.Google Scholar
Bruker (2008). TOPAS V4.0: General Profile and Structure Analysis Software for Powder Diffraction Data (Computer Program), Bruker AXS GmbH, Karlsruhe, Germany.Google Scholar
Cheary, R. W., and Coelho, A. A. (1992). “A fundamental parameters approach to x-ray line-profile fitting,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. JACGAR 25, 109–121. 10.1107/S0021889891010804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheary, R. W., and Coelho, A. A. (1998a). “Axial divergence in a conventional x-ray powder diffractometer I. Theoretical foundations,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. JACGAR 31, 851–861. 10.1107/S0021889898006876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheary, R. W., and Coelho, A. A. (1998b). “Axial divergence in a conventional x-ray powder diffractometer II, Implementation and comparison with experiment,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. JACGAR 31, 862–868. 10.1107/S0021889898006888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cline, J. P. (2000). Industrial Applications of X-Ray Diffraction, edited by Chung, F. H. and Smith, D. K. (Dekker, New York), pp. 903–917.Google Scholar
Hölzer, G., Fritsch, M., Deutsch, M., Härtwig, J., and Förster, E. (1997). “Kα 1,2 and Kα 1,3 x-ray emission lines of the 3d transition metals,” Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 56, 4554–4568. 10.1103/PhysRevA.56.4554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO (1993). Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, 1st ed. (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland).Google Scholar
Maskil, M., and Deutsch, M. (1988). “X-ray Kα satellites of copper,” Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 38, 3467–3472. 10.1103/PhysRevA.38.3467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NIST (2000). Lanthanum Hexaboride Powder Line Position and Line Shape Standard for Powder Diffraction (SRM 660a), Gaithersburg, MD; National Institute of Standards and Technology; U.S. Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
NIST (2008). Alumina Internal Standard for Quantitative Analysis by X-ray Powder Diffraction (SRM 676a), Gaithersburg, MD; National Institute of Standards and Technology; U.S. Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
Rietveld, H. M. (1967). “Line profiles of neutron powder-diffraction peaks for structure refinement,” Acta Crystallogr. ACSEBH 22, 151–152. 10.1107/S0365110X67000234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rietveld, H. M. (1969). “A profile refinement method for nuclear and magnetic structures,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. JACGAR 2, 65–71. 10.1107/S0021889869006558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sirota, N. N., Novikov, V. V., Vinokrov, V. A., and Paderno, B. Yu. (1998). “Temperature dependence of heat capacity and lattice constant of lanthanum and samarium hexaborides,” Phys. Solid State PSOSED 40, 1856–1858. 10.1134/1.1130671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, B. N., and Kuyatt, C. E. (1994). Guidelines for Evaluating and Expressing the Uncertainty of NIST Measurement Results (NIST Technical Note 1297) (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC), available at http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/guidelines/TN1297/tn1297s.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar