Spectrum Analysis - Science method

Adaptive learning in cognitive radio (CR) is a key enabler for next-generation spectrum sharing in 5G/6G networks. By utilizing AI-driven dynamic spectrum access, interference mitigation, and real-time decision-making, it facilitates efficient, autonomous, and intelligent spectrum management. Unlike cooperative sensing, which encounters overhead and synchronization issues, or trading models, which face regulatory and security challenges, AI-powered CR offers superior efficiency, minimal latency, and enhanced spectrum adaptability—positioning it as the most revolutionary approach for future wireless communication.

1. Peak position tolerance: Typically ±5 cm⁻¹ for dispersive IR, ±2 cm⁻¹ for FTIR. But specific bands might have different acceptable ranges based on their nature.

2. Correlation coefficient: Software-based comparisons might require a high similarity score (e.g., ≥0.95).

3. Presence of all major peaks and their relative intensities should match.

4. Consideration of sample preparation methods and instrument type.

You can use consistent absorbance peaks at wavelengths other than lambda max to construct a standard curve in UV-Vis spectrometry, provided they show reliable linearity with concentration. It's crucial to validate that these alternative peaks yield reproducible and accurate results.

The prepared reference materials that can be used with the ICPE-9820 Shimadzu Japan ICP-OES instrument to measure 8 rare earth elements (Eu, Hf, La, Lu, Sm, Tb, Yb, and Ce) and uranium typically include:

1- Multi-element REE standard solution.

2- Multi-element Uranium standard solution.

3- Combined REE and Uranium standard solution.

These certified reference materials contain the target analytes at known concentrations, usually in the range of 1-100 mg/litre, and are often acidified to ensure analyte stability.

Dear Daniel Gitlin

Indeed the first thing that crossed my mind is the 'lamp life' You mentioned many years ago so that sounds as a plausibel reason.

Another thing that crossed my mind is the quality of your sample, I read here (in the abstract): that some purification needs to be performed first.

Best regards.

Dear Rabiu Adamu ,

why not using the NIST/XCOM data base?

Usage is very simple and the data are reliable...

One has to take a bit care about the units ( e.g. MeV is used) and the decimal points in the presentation of the values.

Some instructions can be found in:

Alternatively you may use the parametrizations given here:

Good luck and

best regards

G.M.

Improving the accuracy of measuring Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) directly in water samples using fluorescence-induced spectrometry (FIS) can be achieved through careful sample preparation, instrument calibration, and data analysis techniques.

Here are some steps you can take to enhance accuracy:

By implementing these strategies, you can enhance the accuracy and reliability of measuring PAHs in water samples using fluorescence-induced spectrometry. It's important to maintain rigorous quality control measures throughout the process to ensure the validity of your results.

Is this question still relevant?

If yes, then check out this link https://massbank.github.io/MassBank-documentation/contributor_documentation.html

There are different interferences that can potentially occur in the plasma spectral analysis resulting in the wrong assessment of one or both components. The typical examples are chemical, matrix, and polyatomic interferences which is why it is crucial for the proper analytical techniques to be applied, corrective actions must be taken, and to carefully manage the experimental conditions.

There are various methods but for chemical interference wherein there’s a need to overcome the unwanted ionization of analyte, we use a strategy known as Ionization suppression which weakens or strengthens the signals of specific substances, It modifies the plasma's ionization conditions hence, chemical interferences may be lessened as a result. For the matrix, there is a method known as matrix-matching calibration that helps in obtaining precise and accurate information hence minimizing the effect of matrix differences on the analytical signal. As for the Polyatomic interferences, the method known as calibration curve can used by running through the samples with known concentrations of the interfering compounds. Moreover, collision or reaction cells can also be used to decrease or eliminate interferences by removing undesirable reactions by utilizing chemical processes.

The choice of methods depends on the specific nature of interferences hence it is important to carefully evaluate the chosen approach in order to ensure getting a reliable result in the plasma spectral analysis.

Reference:

Murtadha Shukur Thank you very much for your answer.

Hi,

You should convert G to mm/sec2 (SI system). Thus, the scale factor should be 9807.

Dear Mr. Khalil Bakhtiari Asl,

If your spectrum was received by recording any earthquake at the ground level, then by doing Fourier spectrum analysis you can clearly understand which frequencies are prevailing in the ground motion of this earthquake. This is very important as having the values of the prevailing frequencies you will have a possibility to design your structure you are going to build so, that it will avoid resonance effect.

Best regards,

Mikayel Melkumyan

Doctor of Sciences (Engineering), Professor

Academician of the Saint-Petersburg Arctic Academy of Sciences Academician of the Athens Institute for Education and Research

President of the Armenian Association for Earthquake Engineering

Vice-President of the International Association of CIS Countries on Base Isolation

Member of the USA Association for Science and Technology

Foreign member of the Research Center of Seismic Resistant Structures of the Institute of Industrial Science, University of Tokyo

Eminent Expert of the Committee of Eminent Experts in International Research Base of Seismic Mitigation and Isolation of Gansu Province in China

Founder of the "Save the Yerevan Schools From Earthquakes" foundation Director of the "Melkumyan Seismic Technologies" LLC

+374 (91) 94-54-02

I don't have an answer, but for such a question it is recommendable to care about proper spelling (grazing, not grazine) and tagging, otherwise this question will not appear on the right people's feed.

You can refer to the article, any further query is welcomed.

The mixture of HNO3 and H2O2 looks the preferable for complete plants decomposition.

Hello dear friend

what country and present your species sample

Zixuan Zhou This link might help:

1. https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/474248-bispecd-function-hosa-higher-order-spectral-analysis-toolbox

2. http://freesourcecode.net/matlabprojects/59867/hosa---higher-order-spectral-analysis-toolbox-in-matlab#.YxhQ43ZBzIU

The easiest method is to use the traditional method, which is the titrating the sulphate by a known cocentration of barium chloride solution. Here you don't need to use spectrophotometry.

Otherwise, a simple and precise turbidimetric method of determining sulfate S in water samples can be used . It involves the measurement of the turbidity formed when an aliquot of a barium chloride-gelatin reagent is added to an acidified sample. The method is sensitive and accurate and permits the determination of microgram amounts of sulfate S present in water samples.

I advise you to visit this web page (https://www.daveboore.com/) which explains the details of this topic and there is online data/software which can be support you.

I tried EMD and its modifications. Also Hilbert transform and Teager kaiser Energy operator for the estimation of parameters. If you find any difficulties in these methods, please let me know, I can help.

Dear Readers, I am pleased to announce the latest publication of our work on turbulence and interfacial transfers in bubbly flows.

On turbulence and interfacial momentum transfer in dispersed gas-liquid flows:

(8) Combined Effects of the Turbulence and Interfacial Momentum Transfer On Two-Phase Turbulent Bubbly Flows | Request PDF (researchgate.net)

Just request.

why not consider using S-transform as it combines the properties of FFT and wavelet transform.

Dear Meysam Shahrashoub

You did well using the modified hummers method to synthesize graphene oxide from graphite powder. In this respect, the graphite should used essentially of pure grade and not commercial grades. Now I recommend for you to review the procedure you followed with that in[1] under the sub item; 2.1 Preparation of graphene oxide by a modified hummer’s method ,pp471. Hope you find the missed step that preventing the graphite oxidation process progress.

Best regards

[1]https://pdf.sciencedirectassets.com/278653/1-s2.0-S1877705817X00167/1-s2.0-S1877705817316235/main.pdf

You can use RF compensation while measuring the data.

The attached paper may help you.

If you want to measure impedance in a low cost way, get yourself

1) Suitable signal generator

2) An appropriately sized current sense transformer

3) a two-channel oscilloscope.

Measure the voltage and current as you vary frequency. Oscilloscope will give you the phase relationship between current and voltage across transducer. You can then calculate the real and imaginary components of impedance. I leave it as an exercise how you might calibrate this setup. Cheers!

I don't (classroom) teach, but I always found the original prism experiments of Newton fascinating, leading to the observations of the dark lines in the solar spectrum (absorption spectroscopy) and the sharp emission lines of candescent sources (emission spectroscopy) ultimately leading to quantum theory!

You are asking a very general question. You will find answers to such questions in textbooks or, for example, in Wikipedia. There are several measurement techniques commonly used to determine concentrations or content of heavy (and other) elements. Larger commercial laboratories typically have several complementary techniques (FAAS, GFAAS, ICP-AES, ICP-MS, XRF, ...). Which technique is best, and to what extent, depends on the type of your samples and your metrological requirements. Describe what are the samples in terms of the matrix (e.g. water, plant, soil, etc. samples), which elements are you interested in and at what, approximately, levels of content these elements are present in these samples? What are your requirements for the quality of test results for individual elements? Are they to be made according to specific standards? How many of these samples belonging to a given matrix type will be to be analyzed at one time, and how many in total and in what period of time. Do you have the results of previous chemical (elemental) analyzes of these or similar samples? Do you know what the average cost of performing such analyzes by a commercial laboratory is? An advance payment will be required. Other detailed aspects of the possible procurement of an analytical service should be agreed with the laboratory, e.g. the method of collecting, storing, transporting and transferring the samples to the laboratory.

Please check the link below

Good Luck

Dear Sujan Prasad Gautam

Your second and third paragraphs are about different things. The third one is only about flux measurements. In principle in order to measure the flux of a line you need to worry about the proper flux calibration, response of your telescope, slit loss (galaxy larger than the slit), atmospheric attenuation, attenuation by dust in the Milky Way and so on. SDSS states that all these corrections are already done, so you can measure the flux of the line without doing anything else.

The second paragraph is about measuring SFRs from the Halpha flux. This is a more complex question, because this requires making assumptions. To the list of the issues you stated I would add

1) unknown star formation history. The calibration Halpha flux -> SFR depends on how galaxy evolved in the past. In the most simple way this can be stated that Halpha line is only sensitive to very recent star formation (last 10 Myr or so), so if you are interested in SFRs averaged over a longer period, then you can be severely off if SFR changed a lot over the timescales of 10 Myr.

2) Initial mass function (IMF). If your galaxy has a top-heavy IMF (more massive stars per unit stellar mass), then its Halpha flux will be higher for the same SFR.

These problems are nearly impossible to account for, you can only comment that they may change the SFR by a factor of a few or so.

By the way, your issue (ii) may be applicable to your dwarf galaxies in terms of Halpha emission produced in shocks, but it is unlikely that they harbour an AGN.

Hope this helps.

Dear Abed Lina

I agree with Carlos Araújo Queiroz . He is right this ratio is the volume dilution ratio in water. You have to use pure water. Then if prepare 120 ml of diluted acid

you 120/6=20 ml of concentrated nitric acid to 100 ml of pure water.

In the mixing process you have to add the acid slowly to the water and not the reverse.

Best wishes

Yes- your anti-FLAG antibody strategy may work at 40 degrees. However the comments on biology are also relevant. You could consider doing this in a thermophile that tolerates different temperatures. You could also use something like Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) instead of flag as your tag and then use a GFP nanobody for pulldowns as then the GFP color will allow you to see your pulldowns and follow possible unfolding.

You can use buffer + substrate as blank if your enzyme's absorption range is different than your product's range otherwise the absorption of inactivated enzyme can interfere in your results

Thanks for all the answers, I have solved the problems. Here I want to share my experience, it may be helpful to someone who faces similar issue. I borrowed the reference sample from my friend at first time, but the surface was not very clean and flat. Then I made a new reference sample again, just simply pressed the BaSO4 into a holder(I used the holder we check for XRD...), everything works fine after that. I also compared the data with different sampling method (dropping onto Si wafer vs scattering onto BaSO4 reference), seems doesn't really matter in my case. So make sure the reference surface CLEAN AND FLAT.

Because urea has no IR absorption bands in that region that you mentioned. When you spike milk with urea, the two main absorption bands are at ~ 1457 and 1156 cm-1. One more thing, do those spectra belong to the same milk sample, one spiked with urea another not? Try comparing these two spectra after taking the second derivative that will eliminate differences in baseline.

Dear Sir,

I think following person can help you.

Vicky Bhosale

9833659640

Electronic Enterprises (India) Pvt. Ltd. Mulund(E). Mumbai.

Phone: +91-22-25639904 / 25636011

Web: www.eeipl.in

Will you record the same emission peak regardless of the excitation wavelength?

My suspicion is that you are observing the Raman scattering of the solvent. The Raman scattering wavelength will change when changing excitation wavelength. The shift will be constant (in wavenumber).

Otherwise you might have a fluorescent contaminant.

It sounds like you should certainly avoid that brand or grade of solvent in the future. Generally, at 200nm, only the highest quality (often the most expensive) grades will offer the lower UV abs values. Asking for bottle-to-bottle reliability at 200 nm for n-Hexane is going to be difficult to achieve in general. Higher grades should be better, but at a cost.

One other option may be available to you for your project. If you need a known volume of n-Hexanes to complete your project, then you could just mix all of the needed bottles together to make one final solution for use. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is the relative difference. If the solutions used are the same, and enough dynamic headroom still exists at the wavelength needed, then it should be fine.

You can refer to this video

It depends on which As you are looking for. Because when generating As hydride, +3 (Arsine) and +5 ions of the element would need different hydride generation conditions. Aforementioned answer would help for total As but if there is also a speciation aspect of the study of yours please see following:

Try SAPA package, for R, from Percival and Walden's book (``Spectral Analysis for Physical Applications'', a.k.a. SAPA).

they are two ways of compression. Auto correlation is in time domain and zero-crossing is to assign a threshold to detect the peak where the correlation happens. power spectrum compresses the data in the frequency domain that reduces the side to main lobe 12dB minimum. Each method has its advantages and disadvantages depending on the application.

Here I have attached the spectrum plot of ideal adc and dac present in cadence. The resulting enob=0.293bits

Sinad=3.53dB

SFDR= 6.67dB

What mistake am I making?

Vin= 500mV(DC)+500mV(amplitude)+260k(freq)

Vpulse=0-5V (400nS period)

Hi

Regarding to the dilution,when there is 8.43 mg/L Se , it means there was 8.43 x 100 mg/l in initial solution. According to the total volume(100 ml) you can calculate the amount of Se in food. after calculation ( Stoichiometry ) it is found that 84.3 mg of Se exist in 25 gr food.

So now the Se in 100 gr of food can be calculated by a simple fit ratio:

I think the answer would be 337.2 mg Se ((100 (gr food) * 84.3 mg Se / 25 gr food) Martynas Saczuk

Dear Mrs. Redoune:

It sounds to me like IR spectroscopy which is the base of PIMA (short wave IR). Does the readout looks like that ?

H.G.Dill

The UV-Vis and FTIR are completely two different characterization method. UV-Vis gives the absorption and transmittance of light rays depend on the electronic transition, and you can calculate the optical bad gap of the material. These characterizations are related to the energy ban gap of the material, while FTIR give the vibration energy based on the starching, compressing ect of the chemical bonds that are available on the material.

However you can get clear idea about the bad tailing and availability of intermediate energy bad by calculating the Urbach energy using the UV-Vis data. Also it is really difficulty observe the Cd-S vibration mode from FTIR. Thus the peak may due to different bonding Cd-O, Cd-C2O4

There is free software which will do this, as well as adjustment and filtering, for you.

Thickness 20 \mu m is quite thick and simulation gives the gap at about 560 nm, with gap width about 50 nm and the center gap transmittance of about 3.6e-9 , which is quite dip (~ - 85 dB); My only explanation is - may be sensitivity of UV-VIS spectrometer is not good enough because too much light is going to the detector not through opal structure but from elsewhere.

You need separation by Chiral columns. Both GC and HPLC chiral columns are available.

Hi Raju Kumar,

how exactly does the energy diagram look like, or what would you expect it to look like? Right now, the excitation PL you are showing combined with the description you gave is a bit confusing. Usually, for an excitation PL spectrum, you would let your detector sit on one given emission wavelength (e.g. emission maximum) and let the light source scan through the different excitation wavelengths. However, your material seems to have a bandgap of 7.7 eV, and the defect is located 2.1 eV "below" your conduction band edge; this means the defect is about 5.6 eV "above" the valence band edge? If this is the case, then how do you come to the conclusion that the peak at 1.5 eV is the first excited state, if the energy differences I listed above are all larger than 1.5 eV?

In any case, I would like to know what emission wavelength was kept constant?

what is the sampling frequency you used and what is the value of the samples N you used to claculate your FFT. Can you enlarge the x axis near the maximum of the M plot? what is the repetition rate of the high frequency oscillations? If you enlarge the spectrum figure you can determine it.

Best wishes

I ask you to confirm if the value of the mass at the end is 0.9921mg because the sum of mass K, Na, Mg, Ca for 1 gram of sample should give values ​​less than or equal to 0.9921mg. However, when applying dilution factor, this value is not verified

If you observe two bands by liquid chromatography, that means you have two different compounds. They are separated because of the way they interact with the stationary phase.

On the other hand, spectroscopy takes into account the interaction of light with matter (in this case, the two compounds). Each of these compounds will have a different absorption spectrum, with different bands depending on whether it is UV, visible or IR spectroscopy. However, when taking an absorption spectrum, all the bands of its compounds will be present (some could overlap), so it will have a spectrum with multiple absorption bands.

What kind of spectroscopy are you using?

Dear Agnishwar Girigoswami

That depends a lot on the samples. If the size- (or rather mass-) distribution of metallic particles is well known and there is no significant contribution from dissolved metals of the same type in solution you can estimate the number concentration from the mass concentration of the element(s) determined in the suspension or digestion of the NPs. I would assume that determining the accurate mass distribution is the major challenge for most NP samples/suspensions, because most methods determine a (hydrodynamic) diameter, which is then used to calculate the volume and mass by assuming a sphere. Differences in NP shapes (and/or composition) will thus lead to additional uncertainty in the mass distribution.

You may check the publications for technical details on how the number concentrations were derived. I agree that many publications do not seem to realize how important it is to supply these data.

As opposed to what has been mentioned previously though, particles < 100 nm diameter will usually not differ substantially in their response in ICPOES (or even in ICPMS) when compared to dissolved ions. Using ions in solutions will thus allow for an adequate calibration for such metal-NP suspensions too.

I fully agree with Mr Mario Silva. The term used is nominal absorbance.

Please look at the following below links which may help you in your analysis:

https://crimsonpublishers.com/amms/pdf/AMMS.000518.pdf http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/19980/1/IJCA%2045A(2)%20409-411.pdf

Thanks

I agree with Kulvir Singh for your comment.

I suspect at least one of the peaks relates to contamination from ultrasound probe material (5 hours! Phew!) from cavitation. That's why bottom-up processes will always be preferred.

Check your scale factor value while defining load case for Response spectrum analysis. Scale fctor is Ig/R.

In my opinion when response spectrum analysis is used, the problem of evaluating Von Mises stresse or perming linearization is tricky. The stress tensor at a point resulting from RS analysis has components which (1) do not occur simultaneously and (2) have lost a physical sign. So folks...

Thank you for that answer. In principle, That is what I am doing now. However, with this method only, I lose all CAM parameters. Therefore I use the "strip" method on the new CAM file afterwards and calculate original spectrum - original spectrum + new spectrum. By doing so, I transfer all CAM parameters to the new spectrum.

Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy (FCS) will give information about translation diffusion coefficient (http://www.fcsxpert.com/classroom/analysis/fcs_param.html). Fluorescence anisotropy will give rotational diffusion coefficient.

Please see

Please see

Good question.. Please share me the best answer might you trust...

Regards…

Some practical points: Always filter the diluent before use. Clean nebulizer after use, also the narrow inlet with a thread. A corroded nebulizer chamber has to be replaced. Check the needed air pressure from your AAS user manual and make sure that your air supply has enough pressure and does not fluctuate. Aspirate some sample before calibration so that the chamber gets wetted. At the same time check burner height and air flow (affects repeatability).

Looks like you are using standard MPLan Olympus x100 objective with working distance of 210 microns. Depth of field is about 2 microns which mean that you will loose 40%-50% signal if you are not in actual Raman focus. Just make sure that you are in optical focus on the surface of the sample. Run Raman Real Time display with acquisition parameters which will allow you to see Raman band of interest. After that try to change Z with small step, like 0.5 microns to maximize signal. Step will depend on optical properties of the sample. If sample absorb excitation light, step should be smaller. You Raman focus should be under the surface. As I recall, the strong bands of Si3N4 should be at 185, 208 and 230 cm-1. If bands of the material you are study is close to the bands of Si3N4 you have to close confocal pinhole. If they are far, you may open it to find these band and once you maximize the signal, you may gradually close confocal pinhole and get a "pure" spectrum of your material. By the way, what is the material you are looking for? Send me spectra to sergey.mamedov@horiba.com and I'll take a look.

ZnO displays three major PL peaks : an UV near-band-edge emission peak around 380 nm, a green emission around 510 nm, and a red emission around 650 nm . A minor peak centering at 533 nm should be attributed to the electronics transition from the bottom of the conduction band to the interstitial oxygen Oi level . Green emission with 490 nm wavelength, that the green emission originate from the electron transition from the level of the ionized oxygen vacancies to the valence band.

Read the attached articles for more detailed information.

Source : https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0169433204008025/1-s2.0-S0169433204008025-main.pdf?_tid=60b65bc0-f2fe-44d4-ba11-5f23e39a99ac&acdnat=1532596693_24231fa042f39f54cf6824dfd43f9144

If IR light passes through the Bayer filter, it will be recorded by your camera's sensor. I used an old iphone to see the scanning pattern of a 1310nm laser.

You should record the pictures as RAW data, not RGB and follow the procedure outlined in https://www.osapublishing.org/viewmedia.cfm?uri=oe-17-22-20211&seq=0

I hope you have success in your characterization.

These links may help you Yogesh

Many things can result in DC offset current components in grid-connected (AFE - Active Front End) converters:

• basic issues concerning inappropriate feed-back signal sensing and analog/digital signal processing (lack of DC offset calibration within digital control unit, absence of DC elimination modules on current feed-back paths, irregularities in software implementation of such filters, thermal impact on some sensors and other affected subsystems - in case the converter has to sustain very wide operating temperature range during long term (practically continuous) operation...

• issues related to more/less asymmetrical parameters of active and passive components within the converter's power circuit (voltage-drops, on-resistances and other characteristics, tolerances of filter components like input inductors, DC link capacitors, in some cases leakage inductance and other parameters related to interfacing transformer...)

• power switch issues caused by driver implementation and modulation techniques (dispersion of propagation delay during switching transients, incorrect synchronization of PWM carrier to the fundamental harmonic of grid voltage, intermodulation of some even harmonics

• inappropriate Phase Locked Loop algorithm issues - lack of DC offset suppression and susceptibility to DC component in grid voltage/current, and some times PLL induced injection of even harmonics in the current reference signals (caused by drawbacks of the algorithm, like basic EPLL...) and their intermodulation with the fundamental frequency current reference...

• lack of robustness of grid converter's applied control structure to severely distorted grid voltage by significant content of high order harmonics (e.g. caused by switching over-voltages due to operation of older thyristor-based converters as well as switching transients during start-up of such drives and other non-linear loads relatively close to the converter's point of load ...)

These are just a few basic groups of possible causes (origins) of DC current component, illustrating only top of the related "iceberg" (active DC component suppresion/elimination techniques related to AFE design - power topology/circuit selection and related control system design).

By the way (properly implemented) PR current controller is rather good choice for AFE's current controller.

Best regards

Nenad Težak, PhD EE

Control System Designer

KONČAR - Electrical Engineering Institute

Dear Mohamed,

what is the transfer characteristics of the your system in frequency domain, H(jw) of your system?

Why do you want to solve the problem in frequency domain?

You can solve your problem in time domain?

From the conceptual point of view you do not need to truncate your sinc x function you can use it and multiply it by the transfer characteristics in the frequency domain H(jw).

What i tried is to approximate the sic x function to get an approximate solution.

Best wishes

Dear Sir. Concerning your issue about the Raman Spectrum Databases of Carotenoids such as Lycopene, B-carotene, and Lutein. I think the following below links may help you in your analysis:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3086339/pdf/nihms277219.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17165839

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/96/5/1179S.full.pdf+html

Thanks

Dear Sir. Concerning your issue about the sample preparation procedure for 2D-GIXRD spectrum analysis. An ideal powder sample should have many crystallites in random

orientations, the distribution of orientations should be smooth and equally distributed

amongst all orientations. Large crystallite sizes and non-random crystallite orientations both lead to peak intensity variation, the measured diffraction pattern will not agree with that expected from an ideal powder. If the crystallites in a sample are very large, there will not be a smooth distribution of crystal orientations. Crystallites should be <10μm in size to get good powder statistics. I think the following below link and the attached file may help you in your analysis:

https://old.vscht.cz/clab/RTG/dokumenty/thermo/xrd/Introduction%20to%20powder%20diffraction.pdf

Thanks