how to eliminate the effect of the samples thickness on the intensity of XRD versus 2 theta to have the ability to compare between the samples that have different weight of metal oxide nanoparticle ?
If your nanoparticle are embedded in a low-absorbing matrix, you may scale (normalize) the diffracted intensity to the amount (wt% or at%) or included nanoparticles ... If the matrix is absorbing as well, then this procedure will not be straightforward, however! Good luck, Dirk
1. Please disclose details of the materials you are working with. E.g., composition, expected Nano structural morphology, strain state, film thickness, powder characteristics, production methods, sample loading/prep methods, etc.
2. What is your ultimate objective? Fully characterize the Nano structure or just one constituent in the composite?
3. What XRD equipment and optics do you have access to?
4. What are your typical "thicknesses"? If you think sample thickness is an issue in your case, then I recommend you do not overlook the effect of sample surface "flatness" or "capillary" characteristics or for that matter the positioning of sampling region consistently and precisely as well :-).
5. Post some photos (micrographs also) of the samples and XRD instrumentation.
6. Add more topics (15) up top to increase circulation among the "expert" RG membership.
7. What "known standard" are you employing to calibrate your XRD instrumentation?
8. Why "eliminate the thickness effect" when you can quantify it? Preserve XRD data in its original pristine state as far as possible. Precision is key with XRD! It is better to recognize and deconvolute than "eliminate". Almost the same :-)
The more information, the better the feedback on RG! XRD is a super-sensitive precise simple advanced NDE tool! Learn how to use it well!
As Andre' might have said "recognizing the brand name of the cigar in real space from the smoke in reciprocal space"!