Skip to main content
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Comment on {open_quote}{open_quote}Comments on the use of asymmetric monochromators for x-ray diffraction on a synchrotron source{close_quote}{close_quote} [Rev. Sci. Instrum. {bold 66}, 2174 (1995)]

Journal Article · · Review of Scientific Instruments
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1147148· OSTI ID:385894
 [1];  [2]
  1. European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, B.P. 220, 38043 Grenoble-Cedex (France)
  2. Center for X-ray Lithography, 3731 Schneider Dr., Stoughton, Wisconsin 53589 (United States)
In the article {open_quote}{open_quote}Comments on the use of asymmetric monochromators for x-ray diffraction on a synchrotron source,{close_quote}{close_quote} by Colin Nave, Ana Gonzalez, Graham Clark, Sean McSweeney, Stewart Cummings, and Michael Hart, Rev. Sci. Instrum. {bold 66}, 2174 (1995), paragraph II, the authors{close_quote} unfamiliarity with our modeling codes leads them to claim that our approach to treat bent-asymmetrically cut crystals in ray tracing calculations is incorrect. Since SHADOW is a widely used code, it is important to correct any misunderstandings, and we give here arguments to demonstrate that our approach is perfectly valid, and the arguments used by the authors to criticize our method are based on an unwarranted conclusion extracted from one of our previous articles. We show that SHADOW, when properly run, treats the cases raised exactly. Indeed, their arguments provide a nice benchmark test for verifying the accuracy of SHADOW {copyright} {ital 1996 American Institute of Physics.}
OSTI ID:
385894
Journal Information:
Review of Scientific Instruments, Journal Name: Review of Scientific Instruments Journal Issue: 10 Vol. 67; ISSN 0034-6748; ISSN RSINAK
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English