Closed-form expressions for three-beam dynamical transmission electron diffraction are compared. These are used as a guide to determine the best experimental conditions for the determination of structure-factor phases by convergent-beam electron diffraction in the general non-systematic case. The validity domains of Kambe's [J. Phys. Soc. Jpn (1957), 12, 1-13] 'strong coupling' approximation and Bethe's [Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) (1928), 87, 55-129] second approximation are compared, and these approximations reconciled. A comparison of many-beam calculations with experimental non-systematic CBED patterns is used to determine a three-phase invariant for CdS with an accuracy of ±5° in the electron structure-factor phase. If it is assumed that two of the phases are known exactly, the error in the third (00 2) X-ray structure-factor phase would be ±0.75°. The accuracy of the method for determining phases, atomic position parameters and bonding charge distributions is discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zuo et al. (1989) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: