Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T04:54:22.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Standards-Based Method for Compositional Analysis by Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectrometry Using Multivariate Statistical Analysis: Application to Multicomponent Alloys

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2013

Monika Rathi ,
S.P. Ahrenkiel ,
J.J. Carapella  and
M.W. Wanlass
Monika Rathi*
Affiliation:
South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, Rapid City, SD, USA
S.P. Ahrenkiel
Affiliation:
South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, Rapid City, SD, USA
J.J. Carapella
Affiliation:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, USA
M.W. Wanlass
Affiliation:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, USA
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: rathimona@gmail.com
Get access

Abstract

Given an unknown multicomponent alloy, and a set of standard compounds or alloys of known composition, can one improve upon popular standards-based methods for energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectrometry to quantify the elemental composition of the unknown specimen? A method is presented here for determining elemental composition of alloys using transmission electron microscopy–based EDX with appropriate standards. The method begins with a discrete set of related reference standards of known composition, applies multivariate statistical analysis to those spectra, and evaluates the compositions with a linear matrix algebra method to relate the spectra to elemental composition. By using associated standards, only limited assumptions about the physical origins of the EDX spectra are needed. Spectral absorption corrections can be performed by providing an estimate of the foil thickness of one or more reference standards. The technique was applied to III-V multicomponent alloy thin films: composition and foil thickness were determined for various III-V alloys. The results were then validated by comparing with X-ray diffraction and photoluminescence analysis, demonstrating accuracy of approximately 1% in atomic fraction.

Keywords

semiconductorEDXMOCVDfactor analysiszeta factorsmultijunction solar cells
Type
Software, Techniques and Equipment Development
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , February 2013 , pp. 66 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2013

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

Ahrenkiel, S.P., Wanlass, M.W., Carapella, J.J., Gedvilas, L.M., Keyes, B.M., Ahrenkiel, R.K. & Moutinho, H.R. (2007). Optimization of buffer layers for lattice-mismatched epitaxy of Ga x In1−x As/InAs y P1−y double-heterostructures on InP. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 91, 908–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakhori, S.K.M., Raof, N.H.A, Hassan, H.A. & Hassan, Z. (2011). Photoluminescence and XRD crystalline studies of In x Al y Ga1−x -Yn quaternary alloys. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng 17, 012006-1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bender, B.A., Williams, D.B. & Notis, M.R. (1983). Absorption effects in STEM microanalysis of ceremic oxides. J Am Chem Soc 63, 149–151.Google Scholar
Burke, M.G., Watanabe, M. & Williams, D.B. (2006). Quantitative characterization of nanoprecipitates in irradiated low-alloy steels: Advances in the application of FEG-STEM quantitative microanalysis to real materials. J Mater Sci 41, 4512–4522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cliff, G. & Lorimer, G.W. (1975). The quantitative analysis of thin specimens. J Microsc 103, 179–185.Google Scholar
Dimroth, F. (2006). High efficiency solar cells from III-V compound semiconductors. Phys Stat Sol C 3, 373–379.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J., Newbury, D.E., Joy, D.C., Lyman, C.E., Echlin, P., Lifshin, E., Sawyer, L. & Michael, J.R. (2003). Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis, 3rd ed. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Hubbell, J.H. & Seltzer, S.M. (1996). Tables of X-ray mass attenuation coefficients and mass energy-absorption coefficients from 1 keV to 20 MeV for elements Z = 1 to 92 and 48 additional substances of dosimetric interest. NISTIR 5632. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. Google Scholar
Keil, K., Fitzgerald, R. & Heinrich, K.F.J. (2009). Celebrating 40 years of energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry in electron probe microanalysis: A historic and nostalgic look back into the beginnings. Microsc Microanal 15, 476–483.Google Scholar
King, R.R., Law, D.C., Edmondson, K.M., Fetzer, C.M., Kinsey, G.S., Yoon, H., Sherif, R.A. & Karam, N.H. (2007). 40% efficient metamorphic GaInP/GaInAs/Ge multijunction solar cells. Appl Phys Lett 90, 183516-2. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malinowski, E.R. (1991). Factor Analysis in Chemistry. New York: Wiley-Interscience Publication.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J., Friel, J. & Camus, P. (2009). Impact of 40 years of technology advances on EDS system performance. Microsc Microanal 15, 484–490.Google Scholar
Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky, S.A. & Vetterling, W.T. (1993). Numerical Recipes in C, 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ritchie, N.W.M. (2011). Standards-based quantification in DTSA-II—Part I. Microsc Today 19(5), 30–36.Google Scholar
Rossouw, C.J. & Maslen, V.M. (1987). Localization and ALCHEMI for zone axis orientations. Ultramicroscopy 21, 277–290.Google Scholar
Schamber, F.H. (2009). 35 years of EDS software. Microsc Microanal 15, 491–504.Google Scholar
Vurgaftman, I. & Meyer, J.R. (2001). Band parameters for III-V compound semiconductor and their alloys. J Appl Phys 89, 5815–5875.Google Scholar
Wanlass, M.W., Ahrenkiel, S.P., Ahrenkiel, R.K., Albin, D.S., Carapella, J.J., Duda, A., Geisz, J.F., Kurtz, S. & Moriarty, T. (2005). Lattice-mismatched approaches for high-performance, III-V photovoltaic energy converters. In Photovoltaic Specialists Conference 2005, Conference Record of the Thirty-First IEEE, Florida, pp. 530–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, M. & Williams, D.B. (2006). The quantitative analysis of thin specimens: A review of progress from the Cliff-Lorimer to the new ζ-factor methods. J Microsc 221, 89–109.Google Scholar
Williams, D. & Carter, C.B. (2009). Transmission Electron Microscopy, 2nd ed. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Rathi Supplementary Material

Appendix

Download Rathi Supplementary Material(PDF)
PDF 766.1 KB