Documentation #330

Envelope task #966: === Theory & Manual ===

Documentation #1102: review normalization, especially in view of finite sample extension, finite beam width, and small glancing angles

Take care of kz=0 case appropriately

Added by herck about 6 years ago. Updated over 3 years ago.

Status:BacklogStart date:17 Jul 2013
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:-% Done:

0%

Category:-
Target version:-

Description

Right now, when kz is exactly zero inside a layer, a possible linear amplitude profile is not taken care of.
Instead, the following happens:
  • kz=0 in the top layer of a multilayer sample with more than one layer: this means zero glancing angle and we take T0=1 and R0=-1 (as this represents the correct limit). All boundary conditions at the interfaces are put to zero;
  • kz=0 in the only layer: in this case, we only have Born approximation and T=1 and R=0;
  • kz=0 in a layer, other than the top layer of a multilayer sample: while the correct boundary conditions will be calculated, the used profile is a constant one and T=boundary value of wavefunction and R=0.

History

#1 Updated by wuttke over 5 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)

#2 Updated by herck over 5 years ago

  • Target version set to Sprint 22

#3 Updated by herck over 5 years ago

  • Status changed from Backlog to Sprint

#4 Updated by herck about 5 years ago

The real problem does not reside in calculating the layer coefficients (amplitudes of R and T) but in the fact that included particles in the layer no longer scatter according to the Fourier transform of the shape function (there is no longer an exponential wave inside the layer but a linearly decreasing one).

#5 Updated by pospelov about 5 years ago

  • Status changed from Sprint to Backlog

#6 Updated by pospelov about 5 years ago

  • Target version deleted (Sprint 22)

#7 Updated by wuttke over 4 years ago

  • Parent task set to #966

#8 Updated by wuttke over 4 years ago

  • Parent task changed from #966 to #983

#9 Updated by herck over 4 years ago

  • Tracker changed from Feature to Documentation

#10 Updated by wuttke over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Backlog to Sprint
  • Assignee set to wuttke
  • Priority changed from Normal to High
  • Target version set to Sprint 27

#11 Updated by herck over 4 years ago

  • Target version changed from Sprint 27 to Sprint 28

#12 Updated by wuttke over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Sprint to Backlog
  • Priority changed from High to Normal
  • Target version deleted (Sprint 28)
  • Parent task changed from #983 to #1102

For small glancing angles, it is necessary to carefully consider the effects of finite beam width, finite sample extension, and multiple scattering (#1102). Only if this is properly resolved it will make sense to come back to the very special, practically unimportant case f=0.

#13 Updated by wuttke over 3 years ago

  • Assignee deleted (wuttke)

no hope that I'll be free for this any soon

Also available in: Atom PDF