01583nas a2200229 4500008004100000022001300041245010000054210006900154300001200223490000700235520081200242653004801054653002801102653001901130653003701149653001501186100001501201700002401216700001701240700001701257856007901274 1985 eng d a0141861000aCOMPARISON OF CONVERGENT-BEAM ELECTRON DIFFRACTION METHODS FOR DETERMINATION OF FOIL THICKNESS.0 aCOMPARISON OF CONVERGENTBEAM ELECTRON DIFFRACTION METHODS FOR DE al59-l630 v523 aThe methods of determining foil thickness from convergent-beam diffraction patterns, the Kelly method and the Ackermann method, have been compared in experiments using silicon and iron foils. It was necessary to use the Kelly method to determine the effective extinction distances experimentally. However, tests showed that the thickness determined by the Ackermann method is less sensitive to both systematic and random variations in the data, particularly to variations in the value of the first intensity maxima, for which the percentage errors are largest. The precision in thickness measurement achieved in the study was of the order of 5%. The deviation in thickness determinations by both methods was less than 2%. The two methods are roughly equivalent unless errors can be reduced below this level.10aCONVERGENT-BEAM ELECTRON DIFFRACTION METHOD10aElectrons - Diffraction10aFOIL THICKNESS10aMECHANICAL VARIABLES MEASUREMENT10aMETAL FOIL1 aGlazer, J.1 aRamesh, Ramamoorthy1 aHilton, M.R.1 aSarikaya, M. uhttps://rameshlab.lbl.gov/publications/comparison-convergent-beam-electron01442nas a2200181 4500008004100000022001300041245009900054210006900153300001100222490000700233520084900240100001501089700002401104700001701128700001701145700001701162856008101179 1985 eng d a0141861000aComparison of convergent-beam electron diffraction methods for determination of foil thickness0 aComparison of convergentbeam electron diffraction methods for de a19-L630 v523 aThe methods of determining foil thickness from convergent-beam diffraction patterns, the Kelly method and the Ackermann method, have been compared in experiments using silicon and iron foils. It was necessary to use the Kelly method to determine the effective extinction distances experimentally. However, tests showed that the thickness determined by the Ackermann method is less sensitive to both systematic and random variations in the data, particularly to variations in the value of the first intensity maxima, for which the percentage errors are largest. The precision in thickness measurement achieved in the study was of the order of 5%. The deviation in thickness determinations by both methods was less than 2%. The two methods are roughly equivalent unless errors can be reduced below this level. © 1985 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.1 aGlazer, J.1 aRamesh, Ramamoorthy1 aHilton, M.R.1 aSarikaya, M.1 aSarikaya, M. uhttps://rameshlab.lbl.gov/publications/comparison-convergent-beam-electron-0