Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Published:
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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%.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. R. H. BOER, G. J. BEUKES, F. M. MEYERS, C. B. SMITH, Chem. Geol., 104 (1993) 93.

    Google Scholar 

  2. F. DAIKIN, M. I. PRUDENCIA, M. Â. GOUVEIA, E. MAGNUSSON, Geostand. Newsl., 23 (1999) 47.

    Google Scholar 

  3. G. REVEL, S. AYRAULT, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 244 (2000) 73.

    Google Scholar 

  4. I. ROELANDTS, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 243 (2000) 209.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. J. POTTS, Geostand. Newsl., 22 (1998) 57.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. ST-PIERRE, G. KENNEDY, Biol. Trace Elem. Res., 71/72 (1999) 481.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

  8. D. E. RYAN, D. C. STUART, A. Chattopadhyay, Anal. Chim. Acta, 100 (1978) 87.

    Google Scholar 

  9. C. BERGERIOUX, G. KENNEDY, L. ZIKOWSKY, J. Radioanal. Chem., 50 (1979) 229.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. THOMPSON, Analyst, 121 (1996) 285.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. S. KANE, P. J. POTTS, Geostand. Newsl., 21 (1997) 51.

    Google Scholar 

  12. L. P. BéDARD, S.-J. BARNES, Geostand. Newsl. 14 (1990) 479.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

  14. G. KENNEDY, J. ST-PIERRE, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 169 (1993) 471.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. GWOZDZ, H. J. HANSEN, K. L. RASMUSSEN, Geostand. Newsl. 25 (2001).

  16. K. GOVINDARAJU, Geostand. Newsl., 18 (1994) 1.

    Google Scholar 

  17. E. S. GLADNEY, I. ROELANDTS, Geostand. Newsl., 14 (1990) 373.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sciences de la Terre, Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, SChicoutimi, Québec, G7H 2B1, Canada

    L. P. Bédard & S.-J. Barnes

Authors
  1. L. P. Bédard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S.-J. Barnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bédard, L.P., Barnes, SJ. A comparison of N-type semi-planar and coaxial INAA detectors for 33 geochemical reference samples. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 254, 485–497 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021685904319

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021685904319

Keywords

Search

Navigation