Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T18:25:00.568Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of X-ray Tube Window Thickness on Detection Limits for Light Elements in XRF Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Daniel J. Whalen  and
D. Clark Turner
Daniel J. Whalen
Affiliation:
MOXTEK, Inc. Orem, Utah 84057
D. Clark Turner
Affiliation:
MOXTEK, Inc. Orem, Utah 84057
Get access

Abstract

Widespread interest in light element analysis using XRF has stimulated the development of thin x-ray tube windows. Thinner windows enhance the soft x-ray output of the tube, which more efficiently excite the light elements in the sample. A computer program that calculates the effect of window thickness on light element sample fluorescence has been developed. The code uses an NIST algorithm to calculate the x-ray tube spectrum given various tube parameters such as beryllium window thickness, operating voyage, anode composition, and take-off angle. The interaction of the tube radiation with the sample matrix is modelled to provide the primary and secondary fluorescence from the sample. For x-rays in the energy region 30 - 1000 eV the mass attenuation coefficients were interpolated from the photo absorption data compilation of Henke, et al. The code also calculates the x-ray background due to coherent and incoherent scatter from the sample, as well as the contribution of such scatter to the sample fluorescence. Given the sample fluorescence and background the effect of tube window thickness on detection limits for light elements can be predicted.

Type
IV. New Developments in X-Ray Sources, Instrumentation and Techniques
Information
Advances in X-Ray Analysis , Volume 38: Forty-third Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis , 1994 , pp. 299 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1994

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. Pella, P.A., Feng, L., and Small, J.A., X-Ray Spectrometry, 14, 125 (1985).Google Scholar
2. Kramers, M.A., Philos. Mag., 46, 836 (1923).Google Scholar
3. Heirrich, K.F., Electron Beam X-Ray Microanalysis, Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY, (1981), p. 287.Google Scholar
4. Pella, P.A., Feng, L., and Small, J.A., X-Ray Spectrometry, 20, 109 (1990).Google Scholar
5. Green, M. and Cosslett, V.E., Proe. Phys. Soc. London, 78, (1961).Google Scholar
6. Shiralwa, T. and Fujino, N,: Japanese Journal of Appl. Phys., 5, 886 (1966).Google Scholar
7. Krause, M.O., J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 8, 307 (1979).Google Scholar
8. Salem, S.I., Panossian, S.L., and Krause, R., At. Data Nuc. Data Tables, 14, 91 (1974).Google Scholar
9. Heinrieh, K.F.J., The Electron Microprobe, John Wiley, NY, 1966, p. 296.Google Scholar
10. Thinh, T.P. and Lerovrx, J., X-Ray Spectrometry, 8, 85 (1979).Google Scholar
11. Henke, B.L., Gullikson, K.M., and Davis, J.C., At. Data Nuc. Data Tables, 54, 181 (1993).Google Scholar
12. Fernandez, J.E. and Molinere, V.G., Adv. in X-Ray Analysis, 35, 757 (1992).Google Scholar
13. Karydas, A.G. and Paradellis, T., X-Ray Spectrometry, 22, 208 (1993).Google Scholar
14. Pella, P.A. and Cross, B., Adv. in X-Ray Analysis, 33, 509 (1990).Google Scholar
15. Hubbel, J.M.. Veigels, W.J., Griggs, E.A., Brown, R.T.. Cromer, D.T. and Rowerton, R.J., J. Phys. Chem. Ref, Data, 4, 471 (1975).Google Scholar
16. Schaupp, D., Shuinacher, M., Amend, F., and Rullhissen, P., J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 12, 467 (1983).Google Scholar
17. Hubbel, J.H. and Verba, I., J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 8, 69 (1979).Google Scholar