pymca-users Mailing List for PyMca
Brought to you by:
vasole
Menu
▾
▴
pymca-users — PyMca users general purpose mailing list.
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(4) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(3) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
(11) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
(2) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(4) |
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
|
| 2011 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(5) |
May
|
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(2) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
|
| 2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(2) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(3) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(6) |
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(5) |
Jun
|
Jul
(3) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(7) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(3) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(10) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(9) |
May
|
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
|
Sep
(4) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
| 2016 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(17) |
Apr
(2) |
May
(5) |
Jun
(4) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
(9) |
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(18) |
Apr
(11) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(4) |
Oct
|
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(8) |
Jun
|
Jul
(12) |
Aug
|
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(6) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(11) |
| 2019 |
Jan
(13) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2020 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(9) |
Mar
|
Apr
(5) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(6) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(10) |
Dec
|
| 2021 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(7) |
Apr
|
May
(7) |
Jun
(14) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(9) |
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(18) |
Dec
|
| 2022 |
Jan
(13) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(10) |
May
(8) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(19) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(9) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2023 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
|
May
(7) |
Jun
(22) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(4) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2024 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(3) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(8) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(11) |
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(2) |
| 2025 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(10) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-07-24 15:15:14
|
Dear Armando, Thank you for your help. I installed the Visual Studio runtime libraries and it resolved the issue. Best, Myrsini ________________________________ From: PyMca general purpose mailing list. <pym...@li...> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2025 17:37 To: pym...@li... <pym...@li...> Subject: Re: [PyMca] windows64 -PyMca installation issue Dear Myrsini, Most likely you need to install the Visual Studio runtime libraries on your system. Please follow the instructions at: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/windows/latest-supported-vc-redist?view=msvc-170 or use directly the link: https://aka.ms/vs/17/release/vc_redist.x64.exe Best regards, Armando On 24/07/2025 15:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: Dear PyMca users, I receive the following error message when installing PyMca on my Windows system: The code execution cannot proceed because VCRUNTIME140.dll was not found. Reinstalling the program may fix this problem. I reinstalled it, but the issue persists. The application doesn't launch after I download the .exe file. Could you please suggest a possible solution? Best, Myrsini _______________________________________________ PyMca-users mailing list PyM...@li...<mailto:PyM...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-07-24 14:37:48
|
Dear Myrsini, Most likely you need to install the Visual Studio runtime libraries on your system. Please follow the instructions at: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/windows/latest-supported-vc-redist?view=msvc-170 or use directly the link: https://aka.ms/vs/17/release/vc_redist.x64.exe Best regards, Armando On 24/07/2025 15:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > Dear PyMca users, > > I receive the following error message when installing PyMca on my > Windows system: _The code execution cannot proceed because > VCRUNTIME140.dll was not found. Reinstalling the program may fix this > problem_. > > I reinstalled it, but the issue persists. The application doesn't > launch after I download the .exe file. Could you please suggest a > possible solution? > > Best, > Myrsini > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-07-24 13:59:36
|
Dear PyMca users, I receive the following error message when installing PyMca on my Windows system: The code execution cannot proceed because VCRUNTIME140.dll was not found. Reinstalling the program may fix this problem. I reinstalled it, but the issue persists. The application doesn't launch after I download the .exe file. Could you please suggest a possible solution? Best, Myrsini |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-07-24 07:17:18
|
Dear Michał, In order to provide correct normalized percentages one would have to be sure that all elements present in the sample are measured and that all the measured elements actually come from the sample. Those conditions cannot be warranted and the normalization cannot be applied. Therefore to say 0.05 mass fraction or 5 % mass proportion is just a question of taste and I do not see any added benefit. Without going any further, in the steel example provided with PyMca, the measured mass fractions for Cr, V, Fe, Ni and Mn are correct and, for instance, to go from an Fe mass fraction of 0.64 to a 64 % concentration does not require a huge effort. Furthermore, the sum of the mass fractions of those elements amounts to 0.97. This particular case is quite good, but a normalization to 100 % would modify the concentrations of all the elements when in fact, the actual sample composition contains more than 2 % of Mo that is not measured due to the used excitation energy. Best regards, Armando On 21/07/2025 09:59, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > Dear Armando, > > I use pyMCA to analyze elemental content in metal alloys. However, > metallurgists are accustomed to using percentages instead of mass > fractions. Would it be possible to add a switch to display the > analysis result as a percentage? > > To obtain the result in percentages, I slightly modified the program > code, but not everyone knows how to do this. > > Another interesting option would be the ability to normalize the > results to 100%. > > --- > Best regards, > Michał Olejnik > Poland > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-07-21 07:59:46
|
Dear Armando, I use pyMCA to analyze elemental content in metal alloys. However, metallurgists are accustomed to using percentages instead of mass fractions. Would it be possible to add a switch to display the analysis result as a percentage? To obtain the result in percentages, I slightly modified the program code, but not everyone knows how to do this. Another interesting option would be the ability to normalize the results to 100%. --- Best regards, Michał Olejnik Poland |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-30 14:06:31
|
Dear Amando, Many thanks for the responses. Kind regards Edward Sichangi On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 8:38 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < pym...@li...> wrote: > Dear Edward, > > That can have multiple explanations (bad description of the experiment, > sample, geometry...) but none of them has anything to do with PyMca itself. > Best regards, > > Armando > > On 26/06/2025 17:14, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > > Dear Armando, > > Thank you for the responses. > I have included the multiple energies as you advised and both the K alpha > and K beta peaks for Compton and Rayleigh scattering have appeared. > However, just as the earlier case, the simulated peaks are more intense > than the experimental counterparts. > > Kindly see the attached spectra. > > Kind regards > > Edward Sichangi > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 8:13 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < > pym...@li...> wrote: > >> But have you filled all the energies emitted by your tube??? Run your >> simulation with something similar to the table below. >> >> DISCLAIMER: I do not know if your tube has anything to select a single >> energy nor if the ratios below apply to the emission of your tube. In the >> configuration you sent us you are using a monochromatic beam. Without >> optical elements, you must have multiple energies coming out of your X-ray >> tube and not a single one. >> >> On 25/06/2025 18:08, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >> >> Dear members, >> >> Many thanks for the responses Armando. I have double clicked the second >> energy table but the results are still the same. >> >> As you can see from the scatter peaks, why is the simulated one more >> intense than the experimental counterpart. >> >> REGARDS >> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:34 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < >> pym...@li...> wrote: >> >>> Dear Armando, >>> >>> Attached kindly find the original spectrum and cfg file I used. >>> >>> Thank you in advance. >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:09 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < >>> pym...@li...> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Edward, >>>> My first impression is that you are considering Mo-Ka as exctation beam >>>> and that you have forgotten about Mo-Kb. (double click on the second >>>> energy of the energy table to turn-it pink) >>>> >>>> >>>> Without the original spectrum and the original cfg file it is difficult >>>> to say more. >>>> >>>> Armando >>>> >>>> On 25/06/2025 16:50, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Armando, >>>> >>>> Many thanks for the prompt response. >>>> >>>> The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < >>>> pym...@li...> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear Edward, >>>>> >>>>> Can you provide details about your excitation source? >>>>> >>>>> Armando >>>>> >>>>> On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >>>>> > Dear members, >>>>> > >>>>> > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM >>>>> > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching with >>>>> > their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and how to >>>>> > correct it. >>>>> > >>>>> > See the attached spectra. >>>>> > >>>>> > Thank you in advance. >>>>> > >>>>> > Edward Sichangi >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>> > PyMca-users mailing list >>>>> > PyM...@li... >>>>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> PyMca-users mailing list >>>>> PyM...@li... >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PyMca-users mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PyMca-users mailing list >>>> PyM...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PyMca-users mailing list >>> PyM...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-26 17:38:31
|
Dear Edward, That can have multiple explanations (bad description of the experiment, sample, geometry...) but none of them has anything to do with PyMca itself. Best regards, Armando On 26/06/2025 17:14, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > Dear Armando, > > Thank you for the responses. > I have included the multiple energies as you advised and both the K > alpha and K beta peaks for Compton and Rayleigh scattering have > appeared. However, just as the earlier case, the simulated peaks are > more intense than the experimental counterparts. > > Kindly see the attached spectra. > > Kind regards > > Edward Sichangi > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 8:13 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. > <pym...@li...> wrote: > > But have you filled all the energies emitted by your tube??? Run > your simulation with something similar to the table below. > > DISCLAIMER: I do not know if your tube has anything to select a > single energy nor if the ratios below apply to the emission of > your tube. In the configuration you sent us you are using a > monochromatic beam. Without optical elements, you must have > multiple energies coming out of your X-ray tube and not a single one. > > On 25/06/2025 18:08, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >> Dear members, >> >> Many thanks for the responses Armando. I have double clicked the >> second energy table but the results are still the same. >> >> As you can see from the scatter peaks, why is the simulated one >> more intense than the experimental counterpart. >> >> REGARDS >> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:34 PM PyMca general purpose mailing >> list. <pym...@li...> wrote: >> >> Dear Armando, >> >> Attached kindly find the original spectrum and cfg file I used. >> >> Thank you in advance. >> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:09 PM PyMca general purpose mailing >> list. <pym...@li...> wrote: >> >> Dear Edward, >> >> My first impression is that you are considering Mo-Ka as >> exctation beam and that you have forgotten about Mo-Kb. >> (double click on the second energy of the energy table to >> turn-it pink) >> >> >> Without the original spectrum and the original cfg file >> it is difficult to say more. >> >> Armando >> >> On 25/06/2025 16:50, PyMca general purpose mailing list. >> wrote: >>> Dear Armando, >>> >>> Many thanks for the prompt response. >>> >>> The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose >>> mailing list. <pym...@li...> wrote: >>> >>> Dear Edward, >>> >>> Can you provide details about your excitation source? >>> >>> Armando >>> >>> On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing >>> list. wrote: >>> > Dear members, >>> > >>> > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum >>> using XMI-MSIM >>> > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are >>> not matching with >>> > their experimental counterparts. I would like to >>> know why and how to >>> > correct it. >>> > >>> > See the attached spectra. >>> > >>> > Thank you in advance. >>> > >>> > Edward Sichangi >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > PyMca-users mailing list >>> > PyM...@li... >>> > >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PyMca-users mailing list >>> PyM...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PyMca-users mailing list >>> PyM...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-26 15:04:58
|
Dear Armando, Thank you for the responses. I have included the multiple energies as you advised and both the K alpha and K beta peaks for Compton and Rayleigh scattering have appeared. However, just as the earlier case, the simulated peaks are more intense than the experimental counterparts. Kindly see the attached spectra. Kind regards Edward Sichangi On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 8:13 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < pym...@li...> wrote: > But have you filled all the energies emitted by your tube??? Run your > simulation with something similar to the table below. > > DISCLAIMER: I do not know if your tube has anything to select a single > energy nor if the ratios below apply to the emission of your tube. In the > configuration you sent us you are using a monochromatic beam. Without > optical elements, you must have multiple energies coming out of your X-ray > tube and not a single one. > > On 25/06/2025 18:08, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > > Dear members, > > Many thanks for the responses Armando. I have double clicked the second > energy table but the results are still the same. > > As you can see from the scatter peaks, why is the simulated one more > intense than the experimental counterpart. > > REGARDS > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:34 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < > pym...@li...> wrote: > >> Dear Armando, >> >> Attached kindly find the original spectrum and cfg file I used. >> >> Thank you in advance. >> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:09 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < >> pym...@li...> wrote: >> >>> Dear Edward, >>> My first impression is that you are considering Mo-Ka as exctation beam >>> and that you have forgotten about Mo-Kb. (double click on the second >>> energy of the energy table to turn-it pink) >>> >>> >>> Without the original spectrum and the original cfg file it is difficult >>> to say more. >>> >>> Armando >>> >>> On 25/06/2025 16:50, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >>> >>> Dear Armando, >>> >>> Many thanks for the prompt response. >>> >>> The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < >>> pym...@li...> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Edward, >>>> >>>> Can you provide details about your excitation source? >>>> >>>> Armando >>>> >>>> On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >>>> > Dear members, >>>> > >>>> > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM >>>> > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching with >>>> > their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and how to >>>> > correct it. >>>> > >>>> > See the attached spectra. >>>> > >>>> > Thank you in advance. >>>> > >>>> > Edward Sichangi >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > PyMca-users mailing list >>>> > PyM...@li... >>>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PyMca-users mailing list >>>> PyM...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PyMca-users mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PyMca-users mailing list >>> PyM...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-25 17:13:31
|
But have you filled all the energies emitted by your tube??? Run your simulation with something similar to the table below. DISCLAIMER: I do not know if your tube has anything to select a single energy nor if the ratios below apply to the emission of your tube. In the configuration you sent us you are using a monochromatic beam. Without optical elements, you must have multiple energies coming out of your X-ray tube and not a single one. On 25/06/2025 18:08, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > Dear members, > > Many thanks for the responses Armando. I have double clicked the > second energy table but the results are still the same. > > As you can see from the scatter peaks, why is the simulated one more > intense than the experimental counterpart. > > REGARDS > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:34 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. > <pym...@li...> wrote: > > Dear Armando, > > Attached kindly find the original spectrum and cfg file I used. > > Thank you in advance. > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:09 PM PyMca general purpose mailing > list. <pym...@li...> wrote: > > Dear Edward, > > My first impression is that you are considering Mo-Ka as > exctation beam and that you have forgotten about Mo-Kb. > (double click on the second energy of the energy table to > turn-it pink) > > > Without the original spectrum and the original cfg file it is > difficult to say more. > > Armando > > On 25/06/2025 16:50, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >> Dear Armando, >> >> Many thanks for the prompt response. >> >> The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) >> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose mailing >> list. <pym...@li...> wrote: >> >> Dear Edward, >> >> Can you provide details about your excitation source? >> >> Armando >> >> On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. >> wrote: >> > Dear members, >> > >> > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum >> using XMI-MSIM >> > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not >> matching with >> > their experimental counterparts. I would like to >> know why and how to >> > correct it. >> > >> > See the attached spectra. >> > >> > Thank you in advance. >> > >> > Edward Sichangi >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > PyMca-users mailing list >> > PyM...@li... >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-25 15:58:33
|
Dear members, Many thanks for the responses Armando. I have double clicked the second energy table but the results are still the same. As you can see from the scatter peaks, why is the simulated one more intense than the experimental counterpart. REGARDS On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:34 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < pym...@li...> wrote: > Dear Armando, > > Attached kindly find the original spectrum and cfg file I used. > > Thank you in advance. > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:09 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < > pym...@li...> wrote: > >> Dear Edward, >> My first impression is that you are considering Mo-Ka as exctation beam >> and that you have forgotten about Mo-Kb. (double click on the second >> energy of the energy table to turn-it pink) >> >> >> Without the original spectrum and the original cfg file it is difficult >> to say more. >> >> Armando >> >> On 25/06/2025 16:50, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >> >> Dear Armando, >> >> Many thanks for the prompt response. >> >> The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) >> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < >> pym...@li...> wrote: >> >>> Dear Edward, >>> >>> Can you provide details about your excitation source? >>> >>> Armando >>> >>> On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >>> > Dear members, >>> > >>> > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM >>> > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching with >>> > their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and how to >>> > correct it. >>> > >>> > See the attached spectra. >>> > >>> > Thank you in advance. >>> > >>> > Edward Sichangi >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > PyMca-users mailing list >>> > PyM...@li... >>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PyMca-users mailing list >>> PyM...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-25 15:34:41
|
Dear Armando, Attached kindly find the original spectrum and cfg file I used. Thank you in advance. On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:09 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < pym...@li...> wrote: > Dear Edward, > My first impression is that you are considering Mo-Ka as exctation beam > and that you have forgotten about Mo-Kb. (double click on the second > energy of the energy table to turn-it pink) > > > Without the original spectrum and the original cfg file it is difficult to > say more. > > Armando > > On 25/06/2025 16:50, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > > Dear Armando, > > Many thanks for the prompt response. > > The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < > pym...@li...> wrote: > >> Dear Edward, >> >> Can you provide details about your excitation source? >> >> Armando >> >> On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: >> > Dear members, >> > >> > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM >> > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching with >> > their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and how to >> > correct it. >> > >> > See the attached spectra. >> > >> > Thank you in advance. >> > >> > Edward Sichangi >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > PyMca-users mailing list >> > PyM...@li... >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PyMca-users mailing list >> PyM...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users >> > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-25 15:08:53
|
Dear Edward, My first impression is that you are considering Mo-Ka as exctation beam and that you have forgotten about Mo-Kb. (double click on the second energy of the energy table to turn-it pink) Without the original spectrum and the original cfg file it is difficult to say more. Armando On 25/06/2025 16:50, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > Dear Armando, > > Many thanks for the prompt response. > > The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. > <pym...@li...> wrote: > > Dear Edward, > > Can you provide details about your excitation source? > > Armando > > On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > > Dear members, > > > > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM > > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching > with > > their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and > how to > > correct it. > > > > See the attached spectra. > > > > Thank you in advance. > > > > Edward Sichangi > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PyMca-users mailing list > > PyM...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-25 14:40:12
|
Dear Armando, Many thanks for the prompt response. The excitation energy is 17.5 keV (X-ray tube) On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM PyMca general purpose mailing list. < pym...@li...> wrote: > Dear Edward, > > Can you provide details about your excitation source? > > Armando > > On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > > Dear members, > > > > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM > > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching with > > their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and how to > > correct it. > > > > See the attached spectra. > > > > Thank you in advance. > > > > Edward Sichangi > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PyMca-users mailing list > > PyM...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users > |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-25 14:20:13
|
Dear Edward, Can you provide details about your excitation source? Armando On 25/06/2025 12:41, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > Dear members, > > I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM > pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching with > their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and how to > correct it. > > See the attached spectra. > > Thank you in advance. > > Edward Sichangi > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-06-25 10:32:01
|
Dear members, I have attempted to simulate experimental spectrum using XMI-MSIM pymca software but the simulated scatter peaks are not matching with their experimental counterparts. I would like to know why and how to correct it. See the attached spectra. Thank you in advance. Edward Sichangi |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-02-18 11:14:25
|
Dear Armando, Thank you so much for helping out, and for acting so quickly! The new version works great for me. with grateful greetings, Joen Dr. Joen Hermans Assistant professor Conservation Science Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage (C&R, FGw) Van 't Hoff Institute for Molecular Sciences (HIMS, FNWI) Universiteit van Amsterdam Conservation & Science Rijksmuseum Available on Tue, Wed, Thu and Fri ________________________________ Van: PyMca general purpose mailing list. <pym...@li...> Verzonden: maandag 17 februari 2025 18:49 Aan: pym...@li... <pym...@li...> Onderwerp: Re: [PyMca] PyMca crashes when running NNMA in the ROI Imaging tool Dear Joen, I have just uploaded a newly packaged binary for the MacOS. The PCA and NNMA issues under MacOS should be solved. You can download the program from the usual place. https://sourceforge.net/projects/pymca/files/pymca/PyMca5.9.4/ There are other ROI Imaging plugins that will probably need to be fixed for the MacOS. I just do not have the time now to search for them, to fix them and to make a new release. Best regards, Armando On 13/02/2025 13:45, PyMca general purpose mailing list. via PyMca-users wrote: Dear PyMca community, I'm trying to run an NNMA analysis of a µATR-FTIR dataset (.fsm file) using the PyMca ROI Imaging tool. As soon as I click 'Accept' in the NNMA Configuration Dialog window, using all default settings, PyMca crashes. In the Terminal, the error message reads: "Illegal instruction: 4". I am running PyMca5.9.4 on macOS 11.7.9, and had the same issue with PyMca5.9.1. Any suggestions to fix or work around this issue are very welcome! with gratitude, Joen Hermans |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-02-17 17:49:16
|
Dear Joen, I have just uploaded a newly packaged binary for the MacOS. The PCA and NNMA issues under MacOS should be solved. You can download the program from the usual place. https://sourceforge.net/projects/pymca/files/pymca/PyMca5.9.4/ There are other ROI Imaging plugins that will probably need to be fixed for the MacOS. I just do not have the time now to search for them, to fix them and to make a new release. Best regards, Armando On 13/02/2025 13:45, PyMca general purpose mailing list. via PyMca-users wrote: > Dear PyMca community, > > I'm trying to run an NNMA analysis of a µATR-FTIR dataset (.fsm file) > using the PyMca ROI Imaging tool. As soon as I click 'Accept' in the > NNMA Configuration Dialog window, using all default settings, PyMca > crashes. In the Terminal, the error message reads: "Illegal > instruction: 4". I am running PyMca5.9.4 on macOS 11.7.9, and had the > same issue with PyMca5.9.1. > Any suggestions to fix or work around this issue are very welcome! > > with gratitude, > Joen Hermans |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-02-14 17:20:55
|
Dear Joen, Thanks for the report. I have just reproduced the issue. Basically anything opening a thread in the ROI Imaging Tool crashes. For instance, the PCA analysis crashes too. I will check if it can be easily solved. It might be just dependent on the Qt binding used or version (PySide6 in the frozen binary). Best regards, Armando On 13/02/2025 13:45, PyMca general purpose mailing list. via PyMca-users wrote: > Dear PyMca community, > > I'm trying to run an NNMA analysis of a µATR-FTIR dataset (.fsm file) > using the PyMca ROI Imaging tool. As soon as I click 'Accept' in the > NNMA Configuration Dialog window, using all default settings, PyMca > crashes. In the Terminal, the error message reads: "Illegal > instruction: 4". I am running PyMca5.9.4 on macOS 11.7.9, and had the > same issue with PyMca5.9.1. > Any suggestions to fix or work around this issue are very welcome! > > with gratitude, > Joen Hermans > > Dr. Joen Hermans > > /Assistant professor Conservation Science// > /* > * > > Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage (C&R, FGw) > > Van 't Hoff Institute for Molecular Sciences (HIMS, FNWI) > > *Universiteit van Amsterdam* > > > Conservation & Science > > *Rijksmuseum* > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-02-13 18:40:01
|
Hello, That often happens to me and that is usually linked to a limitation in RAM. Check that by monitoring the memory use when launching NNMA. If it is a memory issue you can either find a computer with more of it or go for some binning. Best regards, Jean -----Message original----- De: PyMca <pym...@li...> à: PyMca-users <PyM...@li...> Envoyé: jeudi 13 février 2025 17:21 CET Sujet : [PyMca] PyMca crashes when running NNMA in the ROI Imaging tool Dear PyMca community, I'm trying to run an NNMA analysis of a µATR-FTIR dataset (.fsm file) using the PyMca ROI Imaging tool. As soon as I click 'Accept' in the NNMA Configuration Dialog window, using all default settings, PyMca crashes. In the Terminal, the error message reads: "Illegal instruction: 4". I am running PyMca5.9.4 on macOS 11.7.9, and had the same issue with PyMca5.9.1. Any suggestions to fix or work around this issue are very welcome! with gratitude, Joen Hermans Dr. Joen Hermans Assistant professor Conservation Science Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage (C&R, FGw) Van 't Hoff Institute for Molecular Sciences (HIMS, FNWI) Universiteit van Amsterdam Conservation & Science Rijksmuseum |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-02-13 16:18:25
|
Dear PyMca community, I'm trying to run an NNMA analysis of a µATR-FTIR dataset (.fsm file) using the PyMca ROI Imaging tool. As soon as I click 'Accept' in the NNMA Configuration Dialog window, using all default settings, PyMca crashes. In the Terminal, the error message reads: "Illegal instruction: 4". I am running PyMca5.9.4 on macOS 11.7.9, and had the same issue with PyMca5.9.1. Any suggestions to fix or work around this issue are very welcome! with gratitude, Joen Hermans Dr. Joen Hermans Assistant professor Conservation Science Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage (C&R, FGw) Van 't Hoff Institute for Molecular Sciences (HIMS, FNWI) Universiteit van Amsterdam Conservation & Science Rijksmuseum |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-01-29 12:16:10
|
It worked, thank you! ________________________________ De: PyMca general purpose mailing list. <pym...@li...> Enviado: segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2025 15:36 Para: pym...@li... <pym...@li...> Assunto: Re: [PyMca] Baseline calculation using SNIPModule.py Dear Ana Júlia, The PyMca5.PyMca importing approach is there for backwards compatibility but sometimes it does not properly work with relative imports. Please use the full import: from PyMca5.PyMcaMath import SNIPModule It should work. Best regards, Armando On 27/01/2025 17:35, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: Dear PyMca community, I am attempting to calculate the XRF spectrum baseline itself (without the fit) using the PyMca module, specifically using the SNIP algorithm. While searching on GitHub, I found the SNIPModule.py and tried to import it to use the function getSpectrumBackground(spectrum, width, roi_min=None, roi_max=None, smoothing=1). However, when importing the module, I encountered the following error: ImportError: cannot import name 'SpecfitFuns' from 'PyMca5.PyMca.fitting' (/opt/micromamba/envs/pymca_env/lib/python3.8/site-packages/PyMca5/PyMcaGui/math/fitting/__init__.py) It seems that I already have the compiled version of SpecfitFuns, but I am unsure what went wrong. I am attaching an image of the terminal for your review. Additionally, I would like to confirm if this is the proper way to calculate the baseline using the SNIP algorithm without any graphical interface. I have already created a script to perform the fit using the methods ClassMcaTheory().estimate() and startfit(), along with a configuration file specifying the parameters. If I’m not mistaken, the "continuum" key in the result of startfit() represents the baseline, correct? Is there a way to obtain the baseline without having to perform the fit first? I would greatly appreciate any advice or guidance on how to resolve this issue. Best regards, Ana Júlia Intern at Sirius - The Brazilian Synchrotron Light Laboratory (LNLS) Aviso Legal: Esta mensagem e seus anexos podem conter informações confidenciais e/ou de uso restrito. Observe atentamente seu conteúdo e considere eventual consulta ao remetente antes de copiá-la, divulgá-la ou distribuí-la. Se você recebeu esta mensagem por engano, por favor avise o remetente e apague-a imediatamente. Disclaimer: This email and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Observe its content carefully and consider possible querying to the sender before copying, disclosing or distributing it. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. _______________________________________________ PyMca-users mailing list PyM...@li...<mailto:PyM...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-01-27 19:17:10
|
Dear Ana Júlia, The PyMca5.PyMca importing approach is there for backwards compatibility but sometimes it does not properly work with relative imports. Please use the full import: from PyMca5.PyMcaMath import SNIPModule It should work. Best regards, Armando On 27/01/2025 17:35, PyMca general purpose mailing list. wrote: > Dear PyMca community, > I am attempting to calculate the XRF spectrum baseline itself (without > the fit) using the PyMca module, specifically using the SNIP > algorithm. While searching on GitHub, I found the SNIP|Module.py| and > tried to import it to use the function > |getSpectrumBackground(spectrum, width, roi_min=None, roi_max=None, > smoothing=1)|. However, when importing the module, I encountered the > following error: > ImportError: cannot import name 'SpecfitFuns' from > 'PyMca5.PyMca.fitting' > (/opt/micromamba/envs/pymca_env/lib/python3.8/site-packages/PyMca5/PyMcaGui/math/fitting/__init__.py) > > It seems that I already have the compiled version of |SpecfitFuns|, > but I am unsure what went wrong. I am attaching an image of the > terminal for your review. > > Additionally, I would like to confirm if this is the proper way to > calculate the baseline using the SNIP algorithm without any graphical > interface. I have already created a script to perform the fit using > the methods |ClassMcaTheory().estimate()| and |startfit()|, along with > a configuration file specifying the parameters. If I’m not mistaken, > the "continuum" key in the result of |startfit()| represents the > baseline, correct? Is there a way to obtain the baseline without > having to perform the fit first? > > I would greatly appreciate any advice or guidance on how to resolve > this issue. > Best regards, > > Ana Júlia > Intern at Sirius - The Brazilian Synchrotron Light Laboratory (LNLS) > > > > Aviso Legal: Esta mensagem e seus anexos podem conter informações > confidenciais e/ou de uso restrito. Observe atentamente seu conteúdo e > considere eventual consulta ao remetente antes de copiá-la, divulgá-la > ou distribuí-la. Se você recebeu esta mensagem por engano, por favor > avise o remetente e apague-a imediatamente. > > Disclaimer: This email and its attachments may contain confidential > and/or privileged information. Observe its content carefully and > consider possible querying to the sender before copying, disclosing or > distributing it. If you have received this email by mistake, please > notify the sender and delete it immediately. > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2025-01-27 17:08:04
|
Dear PyMca community, I am attempting to calculate the XRF spectrum baseline itself (without the fit) using the PyMca module, specifically using the SNIP algorithm. While searching on GitHub, I found the SNIPModule.py and tried to import it to use the function getSpectrumBackground(spectrum, width, roi_min=None, roi_max=None, smoothing=1). However, when importing the module, I encountered the following error: ImportError: cannot import name 'SpecfitFuns' from 'PyMca5.PyMca.fitting' (/opt/micromamba/envs/pymca_env/lib/python3.8/site-packages/PyMca5/PyMcaGui/math/fitting/__init__.py) It seems that I already have the compiled version of SpecfitFuns, but I am unsure what went wrong. I am attaching an image of the terminal for your review. Additionally, I would like to confirm if this is the proper way to calculate the baseline using the SNIP algorithm without any graphical interface. I have already created a script to perform the fit using the methods ClassMcaTheory().estimate() and startfit(), along with a configuration file specifying the parameters. If I’m not mistaken, the "continuum" key in the result of startfit() represents the baseline, correct? Is there a way to obtain the baseline without having to perform the fit first? I would greatly appreciate any advice or guidance on how to resolve this issue. Best regards, Ana Júlia Intern at Sirius - The Brazilian Synchrotron Light Laboratory (LNLS) Aviso Legal: Esta mensagem e seus anexos podem conter informações confidenciais e/ou de uso restrito. Observe atentamente seu conteúdo e considere eventual consulta ao remetente antes de copiá-la, divulgá-la ou distribuí-la. Se você recebeu esta mensagem por engano, por favor avise o remetente e apague-a imediatamente. Disclaimer: This email and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Observe its content carefully and consider possible querying to the sender before copying, disclosing or distributing it. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2024-12-16 16:34:58
|
Hello, Do you have an energy of the incoming photons in your configuration (Advanced Fit/Configure/Beam tab) ? If that energy is below 18.04800 keV, then K and L lines cannot be selected because Rn cannot be ionized on those shells but L, L2, L3 and M remain accessible. Best regards, Jean Le 16/12/2024 à 16:23, PyMca general purpose mailing list. a écrit : > Dear PyMCA Experts, > > I hope this message finds you well. > > I am currently working on XRF data analysis using PyMCA and have > encountered an issue that I hope you could help me with. Specifically, > I've noticed that some peaks in the fitting part of the software are > disabled. For example, in the case of Rn, peaks such as K, Ka, Kb, and > L1 are disabled, whereas L, L1, and L3 are enabled. However, the Peak > Identifier estimates the presence of the Rn Ka line. > > Any assistance or advice on this matter would be greatly appreciated. > Thank you in advance for your time and support. > > Best regards, > > > Mohammad Rezaei Pandari > Ph.D. in Photonics > Gmail: rez...@gm... > > > > Mailsuite Sent with Mailsuite · Unsubscribe > <https://mailsuite.com/en/privacy/opt-out/unsubscribe/d189afe23b01239e83c3d751ce8682f5a237374b/92ac6a0ab4c48fe871201576ec651d9f03c1e0480abdeccf70f0daeeb1bf883bd8d211e0127f13385948c75fe7e36943675fd5de47aa107130ed2111755619b8> > ۰۳/۰۹/۲۶, ۱۸:۵۲:۵۱ > > > > _______________________________________________ > PyMca-users mailing list > PyM...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pymca-users |
|
From: PyMca g. p. m. list. <pym...@li...> - 2024-12-16 15:24:25
|
Dear PyMCA Experts, I hope this message finds you well. I am currently working on XRF data analysis using PyMCA and have encountered an issue that I hope you could help me with. Specifically, I've noticed that some peaks in the fitting part of the software are disabled. For example, in the case of Rn, peaks such as K, Ka, Kb, and L1 are disabled, whereas L, L1, and L3 are enabled. However, the Peak Identifier estimates the presence of the Rn Ka line. Any assistance or advice on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance for your time and support. Best regards, Mohammad Rezaei Pandari Ph.D. in Photonics Gmail: rez...@gm... [image: Mailsuite] Sent with Mailsuite · Unsubscribe <https://mailsuite.com/en/privacy/opt-out/unsubscribe/d189afe23b01239e83c3d751ce8682f5a237374b/92ac6a0ab4c48fe871201576ec651d9f03c1e0480abdeccf70f0daeeb1bf883bd8d211e0127f13385948c75fe7e36943675fd5de47aa107130ed2111755619b8> ۰۳/۰۹/۲۶, ۱۸:۵۲:۵۱ |
8 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
