Skip to main content

Qualitative Elemental Analysis by Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectrometry

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis

Abstract

Before attempting automatic or manual peak identification, it is critical that the EDS system be properly calibrated to ensure that accurate energy values are measured for the characteristic X-ray peaks. Follow the vendor’s recommended procedure to rigorously establish the calibration. The calibration procedure typically involves measuring a known material such as copper that provides characteristic X-ray peaks at low photon energy (e.g., Cu L3-M5 at 0.928 keV) and at high photon energy (Cu K-L3 at 8.040 keV). Alternatively, a composite aluminum-copper target (e.g., a copper penny partially wrapped in aluminum foil and continuously scanned so as to excite both Al and Cu) can be used to provide the Al K-L3 (1.487 keV) as the low energy peak and Cu K-L3 for the high energy peak. After calibration, peaks occurring within this energy range (e.g., Ti K-L3 at 4.508 keV and Fe K-L3 at 6.400 keV) should be measured to confirm linearity. A well-calibrated EDS should produce measured photon energies within ±2.5 eV of the ideal value. Low photon energy peaks below 1 keV photon energy should also be measured, for example, O K (e.g., from MgO) and C K. For some EDS systems, non-linearity may be encountered in the low photon energy range. Figure 18.1 shows an EDS spectrum for CaCO3 in which the O K peak at 0.523 keV is found at the correct energy, but the C K peak at 0.282 keV shows a significant deviation below the correct energy due to non-linear response in this range.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Currie LA (1968) Limits for qualitative detection and quantitative determination. Anal Chem 40:586

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Newbury D (2005) Misidentification of major constituents by automatic qualitative energy dispersive X-ray microanalysis: a problem that threatens the credibility of the analytical community. Microsc Microanal 11:545

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Newbury D (2007) Mistakes encountered during automatic peak identification in low beam energy X-ray microanalysis. Scanning 29:137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Newbury D (2009) Mistakes encountered during automatic peak identification of minor and trace constituents in electron-excited energy dispersive X-ray microanalysis. Scanning 31:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statham P (1995) Quantifying Benefits of resolution and count rate in EDX microanalysis. In: Williams D, Goldstein J, Newbury D (eds) X-ray spectrometry in electron beam instruments. Plenum, New York, pp 101–126

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Science+Business Media LLC

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Goldstein, J.I., Newbury, D.E., Michael, J.R., Ritchie, N.W.M., Scott, J.H.J., Joy, D.C. (2018). Qualitative Elemental Analysis by Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectrometry. In: Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6676-9_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics