Dear Qiao,

Each data is obtained from samples with different reduction rate. So, why did you conclude that this changes are due to the specimen area?

If I were you, I conclude that some significant changes in the crystallinity occured in the range of the reduction rate between 20 -- 35%.

Dear Fukada,

The diffrence in the background signal is significant. The change of crystallinity indeed reflects effects due to cold deformation, but before I draw any further conclusions, I should ensure all curves are of high quality.

Look, the signal-to-noise ratio for the bottom three curves is low. I'm afraid it not advisable to make any quantitative analysis on these curves.

Do you have any advice on how to improve the signal-to-noise ratio?

Dear Qiao,

There are a lot of factors which affect XRD quality. A good scientific approach to a problem is to consider every factors before going to a conclusion.

However, I think your data is good enough to proceed next step.

Here is another discussion concerning XRD quality. I think this is valuable.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_is_the_XRD_measurement_for_glass_looking_as_shown_in_the_Figattached

Hi

I think you are studying variation of two parameters at the same time, so both the parameters may have simultaneous effect on the result observed. So, i think it will be better if you consider only one at a time say sample 15% at 10 mm and 6mm area.

Best wishes

Dear Devi,

It is the low signal-to-ratio of the bottom three curves that made me change the sample. I find the curve quality appears improved with a larger sample, but why? Look, the diffraction peak for the solution treated sample should be so high that the baseline looks like a straight line without any noise.

The attached file comes from a larger and thicker sample, using the same diffractor and parameters. I did not perform any denoise operations. These are raw data. The peak intensity is more than 10 times larger than that of the background, so you just see a straightline without any fluctuations.

Hi

In second fig. you have not leveled D and F. I think these 3 curves (2nd fig) is 3 different samples having different crystallite sizes (F > D > CR50%).

It is important to be noted that

• if the crystallite size is larger it will have higher peak intensity and so the background noise (baseline) will automatically reduced and the baseline will almost look like a straight line without any fluctuations.
• Remember that intensity is given in arbitrary unit.
• Subtraction of background will not affect on the important XRD parameters and can be done easily for each samples and for comparing the curve with a common baseline.
• As Dr Yoshiki has also mentioned, I think your data is good enough for interpretation. I can see important results clearly such as changes in crystallite sizes with % of cold rolling, shifting of peak positions ... etc.
• Lastly, I think background noise and signal to noise ratio are less important compared to changes observed in your graphs (because they can also be removed or smoothen, provided under same condition for all curves).

Best wishes