Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T15:02:43.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Limitations of the Linear Intensity-Concentration Approximation in Electron Probe Microanalysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

James D. Brown*
Affiliation:
Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior, College Park Metallurgy Research Center, College Park, Maryland
Get access

Abstract

In interpreting X-ray intensity data from electron probe microanalyzers, the simplest approximation that can be made is that the X-ray intensity is a linear function of concentration. This linear relationship has been found to hold only in very limited cases. Where this simple relationship does not hold, it is generally assumed that increased concentration of an element is reflected in increased intensity of its characteristic X-ray lines. This assumption, which is always valid for binary samples, has been extremely useful, particularly for the interpretation of X-ray scanning pictures. However, in analyses based solely on observed X-ray intensities, large deviations from the linear relationship can make semiquantitative results misleading.

For multielement systems, the deviations from linearity result in ranges of concentration for each element within which increased concentration of the element does not result in an increase of its characteristic X-ray intensity. The magnitude of these deviations, and. hence the ranges of concentration, is related to the X-ray absorption and secondary fluorescence in the sample, which are in turn dependent on instrumental parameters such as X-ray take-off angle. Such inversions in the normal intensity-concentration relationship can result in gross misinterpretation of X-ray scanning pictures on even a qualitative basis. The various factors that lead to deviations from linearity are evaluated, and methods are given for correctly interpreting X-ray intensity data on a qualitative and semiquantitative basis.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1963

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. Castamf, R., “Electron Probe Mkroanalysis,” Advances in Electronics and Electron Physics 13: 317, 1960.Google Scholar
2. Philibert, J., “The Castaing ‘Microsonde’ in Metallurgical and Mineralogical Research,” J. Inst. Metals 90: 241, 1962.Google Scholar
3. Philibert, J., Institute de Recherches de la Sidérurgie, Internal Report, April 19, 1961.Google Scholar
4. Castaing, R. and Descamps, J., “On the Physical Basis of Localized Analysis by X-Ray Spectragraphy,” J. phys. radium 16: 304, 1955.Google Scholar
5. Birks, L. S., “Calculation of X-Ray Intensities from Electron Probe Specimens,“J. Appl. Phys. 32: 387, 1961.Google Scholar
6. Castaing, R., Ph.D. Thesis, University of Paris, 1952.Google Scholar
7. Wittry, D. B., Ph.D. Thesis, California Institute of Technology, 1957.Google Scholar
8. Wittry, D. B., Tech. Report, University of Southern California, USCEC Report 84-204, 1962.Google Scholar
9. Duncumb, P. and Shields, P. K., Tech. Report 155, Tube Investments Research Laboratories, Cambridge, England, 1962.Google Scholar
10. Stainer, H. M., Bureau of Mines, Information Circular 8166, 1963.Google Scholar