Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-tsvsl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T06:34:05.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of a Solid-State Si Detector to a Conventional Scintillation Detector-Monochromator System in X-Ray Powder Diffraction Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

David L. Bish  and
Steve J. Chipera
David L. Bish
Affiliation:
Earth and Space Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Mail Stop D469, Los Alamos, NM 87545, U.S.A.
Steve J. Chipera
Affiliation:
Earth and Space Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Mail Stop D469, Los Alamos, NM 87545, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new Peltier-cooled solid-state Si(Li) detector has been compared to a traditional scintillation detector/diffracted-beam graphite monochromator system in conventional X-ray powder diffraction applications. Parameters studied included absolute count rates, detector linearity, peak-to-background ratios, detection limits, fluorescent radiation elimination, and peak profile shapes. Comparisons were performed on a Siemens D-500 θ-2θ diffractometer using constant sample and nondetector instrumental parameters. Advantages of the Si(Li) detector include a significantly increased count rate (3.4 - 3.8 times), primarily due to the elimination of the graphite monochromator, slightly lower background count rates, and the ability to change the analysis energy quickly. The higher count rate and slightly lower background count rate of the Si(Li) detector allow collection of data more rapidly than possible with a scintillation detector/diffracted-beam monochromator system and yield improved peak-to-background ratios and detection limits. Significant disadvantages of the Si(Li) detector include pronounced deviation from linearity at low count rates, making accurate measurement of even moderate countrate peaks difficult, and detector shutdown due to 100% deadtime between 4 and 5 × 10 4 counts/s (cps). The Si(Li) detector and the scintillation detector/diffracted-beam monochromator system are comparable in terms of fluorescence radiation elimination, resolution, and peak shape, although it appears tfiat die diffracted-beam monochromator measurably reduces the low-angle portion of the half width of all reflections.

Type
Research Article
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 137 - 143
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

Drever, J.I. & Fitzgerald, R.W. (1970) Mater. Res. Bull. 5, 101–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giessen, B.C. & Gordon, G.E. (1968) Science (Washington, D.C.) 159, 973–975.Google Scholar
Jenkins, R. (1988) Aust. J. Phys. 41, 145–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klug, H.P. & Alexander, L.E. (1974) X-ray Diffraction Procedures for Polycrystalline and Amorphous Materials. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Leyden, D.E. (1984) Fundamentals of X-ray Spectrometry as Applied to Energy Dispersive Techniques. Mountain View, CA: Tracor X-ray Inc.Google Scholar
Post, J.E. & Bish, D.L. (1988) Am. Mineral. 73, 861–869.Google Scholar
Robie, S.B. & Scalzo, T.R. (1985) In Adv. X-ray Anal. 28, 361–365. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar