Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wpx84 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-19T05:21:51.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Matrix and Particle Size Effects in Analyses of Light Elements, Zinc Through Oxygen, by Soft X-Ray Spectrometry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

K. W. Madlem
K. W. Madlem*
Affiliation:
Pomona College, Claremont, California
Get access

Abstract

With the development of soft X-ray sources by Henke, it is now possible to extend the range of quantitative analyses by X-ray spectrometry into the very light element range (magnesium through, boron). Techniques of specimen preparation, recognized as one of the most critical aspects of quantitative X-ray analysis in the heavier elemental ranges, present new problems, especially with the physically and chemically heterogeneous materials encountered in mineral and rock analysis. This paper presents the results of new tests extended into the light and very light element range. It is shown that most of the problems previously found are intensified as lower atomic number elements are considered; conditions of the specimen surface are critical and require precise control of particle size. In addition, significant absorption by relatively heavier elemental constituents, either in a separate phase or within the same phase, causes poor precision and is difficult to predict. Thus, the combination of matrix absorption within and between discrete phases, combined with the difficulty of grinding different phases to a uniform particle size, suggests that fusion techniques are required for hest precision. Without fusion, both scatter and bias are introduced through non-linear calibrations, with each calibration dependent upon specimen composition and particle size. It is concluded that only with nearly uniform specimens, where gross deviations are to be checked (e.g., process control) can ground rock powders be used with success in light element analyses.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in X-Ray Analysis , Volume 9: Fourteenth Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, August 25-27, 1965 , 1965 , pp. 441 - 455
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Baird, A. K., MacColl, R. S., and Mclntyre, D. B., “A Test of the Precision and Sources of Error in Quantitative Analysis of Light, Major Elements in Granitic Rocks by X-Ray Spectrography” in: W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 5, Plenum Press, New York, 1962, pp. 412–422.Google Scholar
2. Henke, B. L., “Microanalysis with Ultrasoft X-Radiations,” in: W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 5, Plenum Press, New York, 1962, pp. 285–305.Google Scholar
3. Henke, B. L., “Sodium and Magnesium Fluorescence Analysis-Part I; Method,” in: W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 6, Plenum Press, New York, 1963, pp. 361–376. Google Scholar
4. Henke, B. L., “X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis for Sodium, Fluorine, Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, and Boron,” in: W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 7, Plenum Press, New York, 1964, pp. 460–488.Google Scholar
5. Henke, B. L., “Some Notes on Ultrasoft X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis—10 to 100 Å Region,” in: W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 8, Plenum Press, New York, 1965, pp. 269–284.Google Scholar
6. Baird, A. K., Mclntyre, D. B., and Welday, E. E., “Sodium, and Magnesium Fluorescence Analysis—Part II. Application to Silicates,” in: M. W. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol 6, Plenum Press, New York, 1963, pp. 377–388.Google Scholar
7. Baird, A. K. and Henke, B. L., “Oxygen Determinations in Silicates and Total Major Elemental Analysis of Rock by Soft X-Ray Spectrometry,” Anal. Chem. 37: 727–729, 1965.Google Scholar
8. Baird, A. K., Mclntyre, D. B., and Welday, E. E., “Soft and Very Soft Fluorescence Analysis; Spectrographic and Electronic Modifications for Optimum, Automated Results,” Develop. Appl. Spear. 4: 3, 1965.Google Scholar
9. Welday, E. E., Baird, A. K., Mclntyre, D. B., and Madlem, K. W., “Silicate Sample Preparation for Light-Element Analysis by X-Ray Spectrography,” Am. Mineralogist 49: 889–903, 1964.Google Scholar
10. Bernstein, F., “Application of X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis to Process Control,” in: W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 5, Plenum Press, New York, 1962, pp. 486–499.Google Scholar
11. Claisse, F. and Samson, C., “Heterogeneity Effects in X-ray Analysis/’ in: W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 5, Plenum Press, New York, 1962, pp. 325–354.Google Scholar
12. Gunn, E. L., “The Effect of Particles on Surface Irregularities on the X-Ray Fluorescent Intensity of Selected Substances,11 in; W. M. Mueller, G. R. Mallett, and M. J. Fay (eds.), Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 4, Plenum Press, New York, 1961, 382–400.Google Scholar
13. Baird, A. K., “A Pressed-Specimen Die for the Norelco Vacuum-Path Spectrography, “ Norelco Reporter 8: 108, 1961.Google Scholar
14. Volborth, A., “Biotite Mica Effect in X-Ray Spectrography Analysis of Pressed Rock Powders,” Am. Mineralogist 49: 634, 1964.Google Scholar
15. Baird, A. K., Copeland, D. A., McIntyre, D. B., and Welday, E. E., “Note on ‘Biotite Effect in X-Ray Spectrograph Analysis of Pressed Rock Powders’, A. Volborth,” Am. Mineralogist 50: 792, 1965.Google Scholar