Comparison of Optical Fluorescence, Electron Microprobe, and Neutron Activation Methods for Chromium Analysis in Ruby
The results of optical, electron microprobe and neutron activation analysis methods for chromium determination in ruby are compared. Relative chromium concentrations down to the ppm range are determined optically in small sample volumes from intensities of R-line fluorescence excited with the 4880 X line of a cw argon gas laser. In conjunction with standards, concentrations dose to the sample surface are obtained from electron microprobe measurements while bulk concentrations are determined from neutron activation analysis. In addition, local inhomogeneities are revealed by both optical and electron microprobe techniques. Advantages and limitations for each method with respect to standards, sensitivity, sampling and interference of other impurities are discussed.
KeywordsNeutron Activation Neutron Activation Analysis Electron Microprobe Chromium Concentration Neutron Activation Method
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.T. C. Damen, S. P. S. Portaand F. Varsanyi, Bull. Am. Phy. Soc., 12, 273 (1967)Google Scholar
- 4.D. F. Nelsonand M. D. Sturge, Phys. Rev., 137, A1117 (1965)Google Scholar
- 5.K. F. J. Heinrich, “Advances in X-ray Analysis”, Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, Aug 9–11, 1967, 5a.eds. J. B. Newkirk and G. R. Mallet, 4O-55, Plenum Press, New York (1968)Google Scholar
- 6.J. W. Colby, “Advances in X-ray Analysis”, 11, Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, Aug. 9–11, 1967, J. B. Newkirk and G. R. Mallet, 287–305, Plenum Press, New York (1968)Google Scholar
- 7.T. 0. Ziebold, Analytical Chemistry, 39, 85B (1967)Google Scholar
- 9.G. Friedlander and J. W. Kennedy, “Nuclear and Radiochemistry” second edition, pg 172, J. Wiley & Son, New York, New York (1964)Google Scholar