Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry

, Volume 254, Issue 3, pp 485–497 | Cite as

A comparison of N-type semi-planar and coaxial INAA detectors for 33 geochemical reference samples

  • L. P. Bédard
  • S.-J. Barnes


While INAA is becoming a less popular analytical technique and it is a mature tool, there are still many improvement happening in the field. The effect of the new semi-planar detector is evaluated as compared to geological reference material and as its performance to the classical coaxial detector. The semi-planar detector offers improved accuracy (about 5%) for many analytes (As, Ba, Ce, Co, Cr, Eu, Hf, Lu, Nd, Rb, Sm, Th, U, Yb and Zn) while the coaxial gives an accuracy in the range of 10-15%.


Physical Chemistry Inorganic Chemistry Reference Material Reference Sample INAA 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. H. BOER, G. J. BEUKES, F. M. MEYERS, C. B. SMITH, Chem. Geol., 104 (1993) 93.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    F. DAIKIN, M. I. PRUDENCIA, M. Â. GOUVEIA, E. MAGNUSSON, Geostand. Newsl., 23 (1999) 47.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. REVEL, S. AYRAULT, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 244 (2000) 73.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. ROELANDTS, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 243 (2000) 209.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. J. POTTS, Geostand. Newsl., 22 (1998) 57.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. ST-PIERRE, G. KENNEDY, Biol. Trace Elem. Res., 71/72 (1999) 481.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. DE CORTE, A survey of recent k0-development and applications in Europe, in: Proc. 4th Intern. Conf. on Methods and Applications of Radioanalytical Chemistry (MARC IV), Kona, Hawaii, 1997, p. 97.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. E. RYAN, D. C. STUART, A. Chattopadhyay, Anal. Chim. Acta, 100 (1978) 87.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. BERGERIOUX, G. KENNEDY, L. ZIKOWSKY, J. Radioanal. Chem., 50 (1979) 229.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. THOMPSON, Analyst, 121 (1996) 285.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. S. KANE, P. J. POTTS, Geostand. Newsl., 21 (1997) 51.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. P. BéDARD, S.-J. BARNES, Geostand. Newsl. 14 (1990) 479.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. DOSTAL, C. ELSON, General principles in neutron activation analysis, in: Neutron Activation in the Geosciences, G. K. MUECKE (Ed.), Mineralogical Association of Canada, 1980, p. 21.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    G. KENNEDY, J. ST-PIERRE, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 169 (1993) 471.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. GWOZDZ, H. J. HANSEN, K. L. RASMUSSEN, Geostand. Newsl. 25 (2001).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    K. GOVINDARAJU, Geostand. Newsl., 18 (1994) 1.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    E. S. GLADNEY, I. ROELANDTS, Geostand. Newsl., 14 (1990) 373.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers/Akadémiai Kiadó 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. P. Bédard
    • 1
  • S.-J. Barnes
    • 1
  1. 1.Sciences de la TerreUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiSChicoutimiCanada

Personalised recommendations