Difference between revisions of "Depth-Sensitive Diamond Topography"
From GlueXWiki
(→Depth-Sensitive Topography) |
(→Depth-Sensitive Topography) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
The following proposal from our collaborators at CHESS was discussed at our meeting 1/17/2008. | The following proposal from our collaborators at CHESS was discussed at our meeting 1/17/2008. | ||
| + | <font color="blue"> | ||
Alexander Kazimirov ( ayk7@cornell.edu ) has been developing a method that can produce depth sensitive topographic information. The first publication is [http://zeus.phys.uconn.edu/halld/diamonds/PRB_Kohn-2007.pdf here]. He thought it would be interesting to examine one of your thin diamonds as part of a study he will be doing at ESRF in a few weeks. Would you be interested in lending him a sample? Because the work involves method exploration and development, the sample could be broken or otherwise not too valuable for your needs, but it still should be a good crystal. The thickness could be anywhere from, say 10 to 50 or even 100 microns. | Alexander Kazimirov ( ayk7@cornell.edu ) has been developing a method that can produce depth sensitive topographic information. The first publication is [http://zeus.phys.uconn.edu/halld/diamonds/PRB_Kohn-2007.pdf here]. He thought it would be interesting to examine one of your thin diamonds as part of a study he will be doing at ESRF in a few weeks. Would you be interested in lending him a sample? Because the work involves method exploration and development, the sample could be broken or otherwise not too valuable for your needs, but it still should be a good crystal. The thickness could be anywhere from, say 10 to 50 or even 100 microns. | ||
| + | </font> | ||
The following dialog ensued between us. | The following dialog ensued between us. | ||
| − | # What is the probability of breaking it? <br> There is no guarantee. Since this is a feasibility experiment, already broken samples are better. | + | # What is the probability of breaking it? <br><font color="blue"> There is no guarantee. Since this is a feasibility experiment, already broken samples are better.</font> |
| − | # What are the plans for mounting it? <br> Pre-mounted (on a frame, substrate) sample is preferred. | + | # What are the plans for mounting it? <br><font color="blue"> Pre-mounted (on a frame, substrate) sample is preferred. </font> |
| − | # What minimum size is required? <br> I would say around 1 mm. Bigger samples (3 to 5 mm) are more | + | # What minimum size is required? <br><font color="blue"> I would say around 1 mm. Bigger samples (3 to 5 mm) are more |
| − | convenient to work with. | + | convenient to work with.</font> |
| − | # Are there any other requirements? planarity? well-known rocking curves already measured? if so, which planes? <br> rocking curves measurements are helpful but not necessary, could be done later if there is any interesting results. Symmetrical reflection from the planes parallel to the surface will be used. | + | # Are there any other requirements? planarity? well-known rocking curves already measured? if so, which planes? <br><font color="blue"> rocking curves measurements are helpful but not necessary, could be done later if there is any interesting results. Symmetrical reflection from the planes parallel to the surface will be used. Which planes will be used depends on the orientation. |
| + | </font> | ||
Revision as of 18:54, 1 February 2008
Depth-Sensitive Topography
The following proposal from our collaborators at CHESS was discussed at our meeting 1/17/2008.
Alexander Kazimirov ( ayk7@cornell.edu ) has been developing a method that can produce depth sensitive topographic information. The first publication is here. He thought it would be interesting to examine one of your thin diamonds as part of a study he will be doing at ESRF in a few weeks. Would you be interested in lending him a sample? Because the work involves method exploration and development, the sample could be broken or otherwise not too valuable for your needs, but it still should be a good crystal. The thickness could be anywhere from, say 10 to 50 or even 100 microns.
The following dialog ensued between us.
- What is the probability of breaking it?
There is no guarantee. Since this is a feasibility experiment, already broken samples are better. - What are the plans for mounting it?
Pre-mounted (on a frame, substrate) sample is preferred. - What minimum size is required?
I would say around 1 mm. Bigger samples (3 to 5 mm) are more
convenient to work with.
- Are there any other requirements? planarity? well-known rocking curves already measured? if so, which planes?
rocking curves measurements are helpful but not necessary, could be done later if there is any interesting results. Symmetrical reflection from the planes parallel to the surface will be used. Which planes will be used depends on the orientation.
