PROBEUSERS Archives

September 2018

PROBEUSERS@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0 (1.0)
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=utf-8
Date:
Mon, 3 Sep 2018 13:11:21 -0700
Reply-To:
JEOL-Focused Probe Users List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
JEOL-Focused Probe Users List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (86 lines)
When the belt and wire were replaced, did JEOL, check linearity and reproducibility?

Sent by Mr. "T"

> On Sep 3, 2018, at 10:58 AM, Michael, Peter <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Deon,
> 
> Is it possible that as a result of the belt and wire being replaced, something is not being reproduced mechanically during analysis vs. during calibration?  For example, if there was some backlash, or something was loose.  Do you approach the peaks from the same direction during calibration and analysis?   Also, if you are flipping crystals during analysis, you may be introducing a whole new set of sources for lack of mechanical reproducibility. 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Peter 
> 
> 
> Peter Michael
> McMan Professor
> Department of Geosciences
> The University of Tulsa
> 800 S. Tucker Drive
> Tulsa, OK. 74104
> 918-631-3017
> Fax: 918-631-2091
> [log in to unmask] 
> 
> 
> 
> ´╗┐On 9/3/18, 6:40 AM, "JEOL-Focused Probe Users List on behalf of Deon van Niekerk" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
>    Hi All,
> 
>    I had the belt and wire replaced on SPEC1 (FCS, flow) and the LDEs optimized, on an 8230 (tungsten cathode).
> 
>    After this the counts collected during calibration (Si, Al, Ti so far) is lower than the counts collected as unknowns on the same calibration standards(!!) (by several hundred), with the result that the unknowns analyzed on TAP1 and PET1 are several wt% too high. This has been going on systematically for a week now.
> 
>    As far as I can tell, the gain, HV, acc potential, current, peak/background times, and peak-background locations are the same between the calibration- and unknown- setups.
> 
>    Any ideas please?!
> 
>    Thanks,
>    Deon.
> 
>    ****
>    JEOL Probe Users Listserver
> 
>    Moderator: Anette von der Handt, [log in to unmask],
>    Electron Microprobe Lab, University of Minnesota
> 
>    Post a message: send your message to [log in to unmask]
> 
>    Unsubscribe: send "SIGNOFF PROBEUSERS" to [log in to unmask]
> 
>    On-line help and FAQ: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fprobelab.geo.umn.edu%2Fjeoluserlist.html&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cpjm%40UTULSA.EDU%7Cbbe7242bad2e46fbcb1d08d611921984%7Cd4ff013c62b74167924f5bd93e8202d3%7C0%7C0%7C636715716543212881&amp;sdata=bntf1bBlFJ0EX9WWMwcqxd8fsUDLwk287lJadTl1wUk%3D&amp;reserved=0
> 
>    *
> 
> 
> 
> ****
> JEOL Probe Users Listserver
> 
> Moderator: Anette von der Handt, [log in to unmask],
> Electron Microprobe Lab, University of Minnesota
> 
> Post a message: send your message to [log in to unmask]
> 
> Unsubscribe: send "SIGNOFF PROBEUSERS" to [log in to unmask]
> 
> On-line help and FAQ: http://probelab.geo.umn.edu/jeoluserlist.html
> 
> *

****
JEOL Probe Users Listserver

Moderator: Anette von der Handt, [log in to unmask],
Electron Microprobe Lab, University of Minnesota

Post a message: send your message to [log in to unmask]

Unsubscribe: send "SIGNOFF PROBEUSERS" to [log in to unmask]

On-line help and FAQ: http://probelab.geo.umn.edu/jeoluserlist.html

*

ATOM RSS1 RSS2