Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-fmk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-29T13:22:54.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EDS and WDS Automation: Past Development and Future Technology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

J. J. McCarthy  and
J. J. Frief
J. J. McCarthy
Affiliation:
NORAN Instruments Inc., 2551 West Beltline Highway, Middleton, WI53562
J. J. Frief
Affiliation:
Princeton Gamma-Tech, Inc., C/N 863, Princeton, NJ08542-0863
Get access

Extract

Early Development Automation of electron probe analysis began to flourish in the early 1970s spurred on by advances in computer technology and the availability of operating systems and programming languages that the individual researcher could afford to dedicate to a single instrument. By the end of the decade, most researchers and vendors in the microanalysis field had adopted the PDP-11 minicomputer, and languages such as FOCAL, FORTRAN and BASIC that ran on these computers. A good summary of these early efforts was given by Hatfield. The first use of the energy dispersive detector on the electron probe in 1968 added the need to control the acquisition, display and processing of EDS spectra. As a result, the 70’s were also a time when much attention was focussed on development of software for on-line data reduction and analysis. These efforts produced a suite of programs to provide matrix corrections and spectral processing, and automation of WDS data collection. The culmination of these development efforts was first reported in 1977 with the analysis of a lunar whitlockite mineral by simultaneous EDS/WDS measurement. This analysis determined the concentration of 23 elements, 8 by EDS and took a total of 37 minutes for data collection and analysis. In this paper, the authors noted the complementary use of the EDS and WDS (WDS for trace elements and severe peak overlaps, EDS for other elements and rapid qualitative analysis) in their automated instrument, a convention that remains common on the electron probe even today. Toward the end of the decade the analytical accuracy and precision achieved by automated analysis of bulk samples approached the limits of the instrumentation, with the exception of analysis of light element concentrations.

Two Decades of Improvements The explosive growth in digital electronics and microprocessors for data processing and control functions during the 80’s was rapidly applied to electron probe automation. Second and third generation automation systems included direct control of many microscope functions, beam position and imaging conditions. Motor positioning was more precise and far faster. As a result, the data collection and analysis of 23 elements reported in 1977 could be accomplished at least three times faster on a modern instrument.

Type
MAS Celebrates: Fifty Years of Electron Probe Microanalysis
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 5 , Issue S2: Proceedings: Microscopy & Microanalysis '99, Microscopy Society of America 57th Annual Meeting, Microbeam Analysis Society 33rd Annual Meeting, Portland, Oregon August 1-5, 1999 , August 1999 , pp. 556 - 557
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

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.Hatfield, W. T., Proc. Ann. MAS Conference 11(1976)67A.Google Scholar
2.Fitzgerald, R.et al., Science 159:528–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Chodos, A. A. and Albee, A. L., Proc. Ann. MAS Conference 6 (1971).Google Scholar
4.Colby, J. W., Proc. Ann. MAS Conference 6 (1971).Google Scholar
5.Yakowitz, H.et al., National Bureau of Standards Technical Note, 769 (1973).Google Scholar
6.Schamber, F. H., in Dzubay, T., Ed., X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Environmental Samples, Ann Arbor Science (1977) 241.Google Scholar
7.Friel, J. J.et al., Proc. Ann. MAS Conference 12(1977) 50A.Google Scholar
8.Newbury, D. E.et al, Anal. Chem. 62(1990) 1159ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Marinenko, R. B.et al., J. Micros. 145(1987)207.Google Scholar
10.Bastin, G. F. and Heijligers, H. J. M., in Heinrich, K.F.J. and Newbury, D. E. eds., Electron Probe Quantitation, Plenum Press (1991)145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Wollman, D. A.et al., Proc. Microscopy and Microanalysis 1997 (1997) 1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar