Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2015;50(2):493-518.
doi: 10.1007/s10853-014-8685-2. Epub 2014 Nov 12.

Performing elemental microanalysis with high accuracy and high precision by scanning electron microscopy/silicon drift detector energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (SEM/SDD-EDS)

Affiliations
Review

Performing elemental microanalysis with high accuracy and high precision by scanning electron microscopy/silicon drift detector energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (SEM/SDD-EDS)

Dale E Newbury et al. J Mater Sci. 2015.

Abstract

Electron-excited X-ray microanalysis performed in the scanning electron microscope with energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDS) is a core technique for characterization of the microstructure of materials. The recent advances in EDS performance with the silicon drift detector (SDD) enable accuracy and precision equivalent to that of the high spectral resolution wavelength-dispersive spectrometer employed on the electron probe microanalyzer platform. SDD-EDS throughput, resolution, and stability provide practical operating conditions for measurement of high-count spectra that form the basis for peak fitting procedures that recover the characteristic peak intensities even for elemental combination where severe peak overlaps occur, such PbS, MoS2, BaTiO3, SrWO4, and WSi2. Accurate analyses are also demonstrated for interferences involving large concentration ratios: a major constituent on a minor constituent (Ba at 0.4299 mass fraction on Ti at 0.0180) and a major constituent on a trace constituent (Ba at 0.2194 on Ce at 0.00407; Si at 0.1145 on Ta at 0.0041). Accurate analyses of low atomic number elements, C, N, O, and F, are demonstrated. Measurement of trace constituents with limits of detection below 0.001 mass fraction (1000 ppm) is possible within a practical measurement time of 500 s.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Distribution of relative errors [(measured − true)/true × 100 %] using the k-ratio protocol with WDS measurements and matrix corrections with the NBS ZAF procedure FRAME (1975) [5]. Note that the histogram bins have a width of 1 % relative
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Distribution of relative errors observed for a commercial implementation of standardless analysis (2013). Note that the histogram bins have a width of 5 % relative
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
a Analysis of NIST SRM 470 (K411 glass) as a flat, highly polished bulk sample (final polish with 100 nm alumina) using the k-ratio protocol with SDD-EDS measurements and NIST DTSA-II. Plot of Fe (normalized weight percent) vs. Mg (normalized weight percent) for 20 randomly selected analyses. Note the outlier (circled). b Analysis of NIST SRM 470 (K411 glass) as a flat, but slightly scratched bulk sample (scratches remaining after 1 µm diamond polish) using the k-ratio protocol with SDD-EDS measurements and NIST DTSA-II. Plot of Fe (normalized weight percent) vs. Mg (normalized weight percent) for 20 randomly selected analyses
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Analysis of NIST SRM 470 (K411 glass) in various geometric forms (flat, polished bulk; scratched surface after 600-grit grinding; shallow surface holes, chips, and shards) using the k-ratio protocol with SDD-EDS measurements and NIST DTSA-II. Plot of Fe (normalized weight percent) vs. Mg (normalized weight percent) [19]
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Analysis of NIST SRM 470 (K411 glass) in various geometric forms (flat, polished bulk; scratched surface after 600-grit grinding; shallow surface holes, chips, and shards) using the k-ratio protocol with SDD-EDS measurements and NIST DTSA-II: a Mg (normalized weight percent) vs. the raw analytical total (weight percent), including oxygen calculated by assumed stoichiometry [19], b Fe (normalized weight percent) vs. the raw analytical total (weight percent), including oxygen calculated by assumed stoichiometry [19]
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Automatic peak identification of potassium bromide, showing misidentification of BrLα,β as AlK; note also misidentification of minor BrLl peak as AsLα,β [–18]
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
a Gold, beam energy 20 keV, showing correct identification of the Au L-family and M-family [–18]. b Gold, beam energy 10 keV, showing misidentification of the Au M-family as the Zr L-family and Nb L-family [–18]
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
a Lead, beam energy 20 keV, showing correct identification of the Pb L-family and PbMα,β, but misidentification of PbMζ as WM and PbM2N4 as CdL [–18]. b NIST glass K230 with Pb as a major constituent, beam energy 20 keV; the Pb M-family is misidentified as SK and TcL, while the Pb L-family is ignored [–18]
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
a SDD-EDS (four-detector array) spectra of manganese with a beam energy of E 0 = 20 keV collected over a range of input count rates resulting in deadtime from 2 to 77 % showing the MnKα–MnKβ peak region. Note excellent superposition of the peaks after scaling to the MnKα peak integral. b MnL peak region. Note excellent superposition of the peaks after scaling to the MnLα peak integral
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
a In-growth of coincidence (sum) peaks: NIST SRM 470 (K412 glass) over a sequence of detector deadtimes, b deadtimes from 1 to 48 %, with all spectra scaled to the full spectrum integral
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Comparison of the k-ratios measured simultaneously by SDD-EDS (red) and WDS (blue) in barium titantate, benitoite (Ba), and a series of Ba/Ti/Si glasses spanning a mass concentration range as high as Ba:Ti of 24:1 (Color figure online)
Fig. 12
Fig. 12
SDD-EDS spectrum of PbS (galena) at a beam energy of E 0 = 10 keV (red); residual spectrum (blue) after peak fitting with CdS and PbSe (Color figure online)
Fig. 13
Fig. 13
SDD-EDS spectrum of the MoS2 with E 0 = 10 keV (red); residual spectrum after MLLSQ peak fitting (blue) (Color figure online)
Fig. 14
Fig. 14
SDD-EDS spectrum of BaTiO3 at a beam energy of E 0 = 10 keV (red); residual spectrum (blue) after peak fitting with Ti and BaSi2O5 (sanbornite) (Color figure online)
Fig. 15
Fig. 15
SDD-EDS spectrum of SrWO4 at a beam energy of E 0 = 10 keV (red); residual spectrum (blue) after peak fitting with SrF2 and W (Color figure online)
Fig. 16
Fig. 16
SDD-EDS spectrum of WSi2 at a beam energy of E 0 = 10 keV (red); residual spectrum (blue) after peak fitting with Si and W (Color figure online)
Fig. 17
Fig. 17
a SDD-EDS spectrum of NIST microanalysis glass K2496 showing the Ba–Ti region of the spectrum around 4.5 keV (red), and the residual spectrum after fitting for Si, Ba, and Ti (blue). Beam energy 10 keV; dose 1000 nAs; spectrum integral 0.1–10 keV = 12.175 million counts; b The same measured spectrum but with fitting only for Si and Ba (red), revealing the low-level TiKα and TiKβ peaks in the residual spectrum (blue) (Color figure online)
Fig. 18
Fig. 18
a SDD-EDS spectrum of NIST microanalysis glass K873 (red) and the residual spectrum after fitting for all constituents (blue). Beam energy 15 keV; dose 22500 nAs; spectrum integral 0.1–15 keV = 74.17 million counts. b The same measured spectrum but with fitting excluded for Ta and Ce (red), revealing the low-level Ce L-family and Ta M-family peaks in the residual spectrum (blue) (Color figure online)
Fig. 19
Fig. 19
SDD-EDS spectrum of Cr2N (red) and residual spectrum (blue) after MLLS fitting: a full spectrum, b expanded to show the low photon energy region (Color figure online)
Fig. 20
Fig. 20
SDD-EDS spectrum of NIST microanalysis glasses K496 (blue) and K497 (red) (Color figure online)
Fig. 21
Fig. 21
Analysis of S and Fe at several locations on a fragment of pyrite, FeS2. The normalized mass concentrations, relative errors, and the raw unnormalized analytical total obtained following k-ratio protocol analyses with NIST DTSA-II (Fe and CuS standards) are indicated at selected locations (Everhart–Thornley detector SEM image)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Castaing R (1951) Application of electron probes to metallographic analysis. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Paris
    1. Goldstein J, Newbury D, Joy D, Lyman C, Echlin P, Lifshin E, Sawyer L, Michael J. Scanning electron microscopy and X-ray microanalysis. 3. New York: Springer; 2003.
    1. Heinrich K. Electron beam X-ray microanalysis. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1981. pp. 99–140.
    1. Yakowitz H (1968) Evaluation of specimen preparation and the use of standards in electron probe microanalysis. In: Fifty years of progress in metallographic techniques, ASTM-special technical publication 430. American Society of Testing and Materials, Philadelphia 430, pp 383–408
    1. Yakowitz H (1975) Methods of quantitative analysis. In: Goldstein JI, Yakowitz H, Newbury DE, Lifshin E, Colby JW, Coleman JR (eds.) Practical scanning electron microscopy. Plenum, New York, p 338 (error histogram derived from Heinrich K, Yakowitz H, Vieth D (1972) Proceedings of 7th conference electron probe analysis, Microanalysis Society)