Uncertainties in the Analysis of M X-Ray Lines of the Rare-Earth Elements
Electron probe x-ray microanalysis by M lines poses some inherent problems similar in a certain respect to those arising during the analysis of light elements. The energy of the radiation is rather low, so that the measurement is more sensitive to absorption and contamination effects and the closeness of other lines is more of a problem. The requirements for the quality of the surface are therefore stricter than usual. Because of the important role of the outer shells in the x-ray generation process, chemical effects can also be pronounced. To make matters worse, the lack of reliable atomic constants (mass absorption coefficients (macs), fluorescence and Coster-Kronig yields, relative line intensities etc.) for the M lines is often conspicuous.
KeywordsBeam Energy Anomalous Absorption Mass Absorption Coefficient Wavelength Dispersive Spectrometer Relative Line Intensity
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Saloman, E. B. and Hubbell, J. H. (1988), At. Data Nucl. Data Tables.Google Scholar
- Heinrich, K. F. J. (1986), 11th Int. Cong. on X-Ray Optics and Microanalysis, London (Canada), 67–119.Google Scholar
- White, E. W. and Johnson, G. G. (1970), ASTM Data Series DS 37AGoogle Scholar
- Johnson, G. G. and White, E. W. (1970), ASTM Data Series DS 46.Google Scholar
- Wendt, M. (1987), personal communication.Google Scholar
- Chen, M. H., et al. (1983), Phys. Rev. A27, 2889.Google Scholar
- Pouchou, J. L. and Pichoir, F. (1986), 11th Int. Cong. on X-Ray Optics and Microanalysis, London (Canada), 249–253. Errata was presented in: 1st European Workshop on Modern Developments and Applications in Microbeam Analysis, 1989, Antwerp, p. 146. Concerning the mass absorption determinations, see Appendix 5, p. 59 of Pouchou and Pichoir’s paper in this publication.Google Scholar