Scholarlink

<p>As observed in XRD figures (Rani et al., J Mater Sci Mater Electron 29:1975–1984, 2018), the obtained three samples XRD pattern exhibit subtle differences. These subtle variations revealed small variations in concentration of anhydrous ferric chloride (0.02&#xa0;M, 0.04&#xa0;M and 0.06&#xa0;M FeCl<sub>3</sub> concentrations). The high intensive sharp diffraction in these products revealed good crystalline nature. However, the degree of crystallinity has also increased for the second and third sample (Fig.&#xa0;1b, c) when compared to Fig.&#xa0;1a. The positions of the diffraction peaks differ between Figs.&#xa0;1b and 1c, indicating a variation in the crystallographic structure or phase. A noticeable shift in the peak positions is observed, which could suggest changes in the sample's composition. The intensities of the peaks in the two figures are not the same, which could point to differences in the crystalline quality or orientation of the material in each case. The full width at half maximum (FWHM) values, which indicate the broadness of the peaks, vary between Figs.&#xa0;1b and c, possibly reflecting differences in crystallite size, and macrostrain. The observations listed below are pieces of evidences for that XRD pattern of Fig.&#xa0;1a–c are unique (Rani et al. 2018). The noticed typo errors and repetition of values in Rows 2 and 3 in Table&#xa0;1 in the published article are corrected (Rani et al. 2018). We have corrected Table&#xa0;4 in this revised article.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

X-ray diffraction pattern of CuFe2O4

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月19日

查看全文
  • B. Jansi Rani,
  • B. Saravanakumar,
  • G. Ravi,
  • V. Ganesh,
  • S. Ravichandran,
  • R. Yuvakkumar

摘要

As observed in XRD figures (Rani et al., J Mater Sci Mater Electron 29:1975–1984, 2018), the obtained three samples XRD pattern exhibit subtle differences. These subtle variations revealed small variations in concentration of anhydrous ferric chloride (0.02 M, 0.04 M and 0.06 M FeCl3 concentrations). The high intensive sharp diffraction in these products revealed good crystalline nature. However, the degree of crystallinity has also increased for the second and third sample (Fig. 1b, c) when compared to Fig. 1a. The positions of the diffraction peaks differ between Figs. 1b and 1c, indicating a variation in the crystallographic structure or phase. A noticeable shift in the peak positions is observed, which could suggest changes in the sample's composition. The intensities of the peaks in the two figures are not the same, which could point to differences in the crystalline quality or orientation of the material in each case. The full width at half maximum (FWHM) values, which indicate the broadness of the peaks, vary between Figs. 1b and c, possibly reflecting differences in crystallite size, and macrostrain. The observations listed below are pieces of evidences for that XRD pattern of Fig. 1a–c are unique (Rani et al. 2018). The noticed typo errors and repetition of values in Rows 2 and 3 in Table 1 in the published article are corrected (Rani et al. 2018). We have corrected Table 4 in this revised article.