International
Tables for
Crystallography
Volume F
Crystallography of biological macromolecules
Edited by M. G. Rossmann and E. Arnold

International Tables for Crystallography (2006). Vol. F. ch. 6.1, pp. 129-131   | 1 | 2 |

Section 6.1.4.1. X-ray mirrors

U. W. Arndta

a Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Medical Research Council, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 2QH, England

6.1.4.1. X-ray mirrors

| top | pdf |

It is usually necessary to focus the X-ray beam in two orthogonal directions. This can be achieved either by means of one mirror with curvatures in two orthogonal planes or by two successive reflections from two mirrors which are curved in one plane and planar in the other; the two planes of curvature must be at right angles to one another. In the arrangement adopted by Kirkpatrick & Baez (1948[link]) and by Franks (1955[link]), the two mirrors lie one behind the other (Fig. 6.1.4.1[link]) and thus produce a different degree of collimation in the two planes. Instead of this tandem arrangement, the mirrors can lie side-by-side, as proposed by Montel (1957[link]), to form what the author calls a `catamegonic roof' (Fig. 6.1.4.2[link]). The mirrors are then best made from thicker material, and the reflecting surfaces are ground to the appropriate curvature. The same arrangement has been used by Osmic Inc. (1998[link]) for their Confocal Max-Flux Optics, in which the curved surfaces are coated with graded-spacing multilayers.

[Figure 6.1.4.1]

Figure 6.1.4.1 | top | pdf |

Production of a point focus by successive reflections at two orthogonal curved mirrors. Arrangement due to Kirkpatrick & Baez (1948[link]) and to Franks (1955[link]).

[Figure 6.1.4.2]

Figure 6.1.4.2 | top | pdf |

The `catamegonic' arrangement of Montel (1957[link]), in which two confocal mirrors with orthogonal curvatures lie side-by-side.

Flat mirror plates can be bent elastically to a desired curvature by applying appropriate couples. Fig. 6.1.4.3[link] shows the bending method adopted by Franks (1955[link]). A cylindrical curvature results from a symmetrical arrangement that produces equal couples at both ends. With appropriate unequal couples applied at the two ends of the plate, the curvature can be made parabolic or elliptical. Precision elliptical mirrors have been produced by Padmore et al. (1997[link]); unequal couples are applied in this way. Cylindrically curved mirrors can be produced by applying a force at the tip of a triangular plate whose base is firmly anchored (Fig. 6.1.4.4[link]). Lemonnier et al. (1978[link]) first used this method for making curved-crystal monochromators. Milch (1983[link]) described X-ray mirrors made in this way; the effect of the linear increase of the bending moment along the plate is compensated by the linear increase of the plate section so that the curvature is constant. An elliptical or a parabolic curvature results if either the width or the thickness of the plate is made to vary in an appropriate way along the length of the plate. Arndt, Long & Duncumb (1998[link]) described a monolithic mirror-bending block in which the mirror plates are inserted into slots cut to an elliptical curvature by ion-beam machining. The solid angle of collection is made four times larger than for a two-mirror arrangement by providing a pair of horizontal mirrors and a pair of vertical mirrors in tandem in one block (Fig. 6.1.4.5[link]).

[Figure 6.1.4.3]

Figure 6.1.4.3 | top | pdf |

Mirror bender (after Franks, 1955[link]). The force exerted by the screw produces two equal couples which bend the mirror into a circular arc. The slotted rods act as pivots and also as beam-defining slits.

[Figure 6.1.4.4]

Figure 6.1.4.4 | top | pdf |

Triangular mirror bender as described by Lemonnier et al. (1978[link]) for crystal plates and by Milch (1983[link]) for glass mirrors. The base of the triangular plate is clamped and the bending force is applied at the apex along the arrow.

[Figure 6.1.4.5]

Figure 6.1.4.5 | top | pdf |

Mirror holder with machined slots for two orthogonal pairs of curved mirrors (after Arndt, Duncumb et al., 1998[link]).

Mirror plates for these benders are usually made from highly polished glass, quartz, or silicon plates which are coated with nickel, gold, or iridium.

Mirrors for synchrotron beam lines that focus the radiation in the vertical plane are most often ground and polished to the correct shape, rather than bent elastically. Much longer mirrors can be made in this way.

The collecting efficiency of specularly reflecting mirrors depends on the reflectivity of the surface and on the solid angle of collection; this, in turn, is a function of the maximum glancing angle of incidence, which is the critical angle for total external reflection, θc. For X-rays of wavelength λ, measured in Å,[\theta_{c} \simeq 2.32 \times 10^{-3} (Z\rho/A)^{1/2} \lambda, ] where Z is the atomic number, A is the atomic mass and ρ is the specific gravity of the reflecting surface.

Thus, for Cu Kα radiation and a gold surface, θc ≃ 10 mrad. The reflectivity of the mirror surface is strongly dependent on the surface roughness; for the reflectivity to be more than 50%, the r.m.s. roughness must not exceed 10 Å.

It is not possible to design a reflecting collimator with a planar angle of collection greater than about 3θc. For the shorter wavelengths, in particular, variable-spacing multilayer mirrors (Schuster & Göbel, 1997[link]) hold considerable promise. If the spacing at the upstream end of the mirror is 30 Å, the largest angles of incidence will be 26 and 17 mrad for 1.54 and 1.0 Å X-rays, respectively. By comparison, the critical angles at a gold surface for these radiations are 10 and 6.5 mrad, respectively.

References

First citation Osmic Inc. (1998). Sales literature. Osmic Inc., Troy, Michigan, USA.Google Scholar
First citation Arndt, U. W., Long, J. V. P. & Duncumb, P. (1998). A microfocus X-ray tube used with focusing collimators. J. Appl. Cryst. 31, 936–944.Google Scholar
First citation Franks, A. (1995). An optically focusing X-ray diffraction camera. Proc. Phys. Soc. London Sect. B, 68, 1054–1069.Google Scholar
First citation Kirkpatrick, P. & Baez, A. V. (1948). J. Opt. Soc. Am. 56, 1–13.Google Scholar
First citation Lemonnier, M., Fourme, R., Rousseaux, F. & Kahn, R. (1978). X-ray curved-crystal monochromator system at the storage ring DCI. Nucl. Instrum. Methods, 152, 173–177.Google Scholar
First citation Milch, J. R. (1983). A focusing X-ray camera for recording low-angle diffraction from small specimens. J. Appl. Cryst. 16, 198–203.Google Scholar
First citation Montel, M. (1957). X-ray microscopy with catamegonic roof mirrors. In X-ray microscopy and microradiography, edited by V. E. Cosslett, A. Engstrom & H. H. Pattee Jr, pp. 177–185. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
First citation Padmore, H. A., Ackermann, G., Celestre, R., Chang, C. H., Franck, K., Howells, M., Hussain, Z., Irick, S., Locklin, S., MacDowell, A. A., Patel, J. R., Rah, S. Y., Renner, T. R. & Sandler, R. (1997). Submicron white-beam focusing using elliptically bent mirrors. Synchrotron Radiat. News, 10, 18–26.Google Scholar
First citation Schuster, M. & Göbel, H. (1997). Application of graded multi-layer optics in X-ray diffraction. Adv. X-ray Anal. 39, 57–71.Google Scholar








































to end of page
to top of page