Hi Julien,

first off I would strongly recommend as matrix correction method PROZA with
the FFAST MAC table or using Armstrong ZAF with a combination of empirical
MACs of Bastin&Heijligers and FFAST (in my experience from nitrogen both
give me the same numbers). I get much better data for ultralight elements
with this combination.

I assume that you checked that you are not running into any problems with
detector saturation and pulse height depression for the major elements at
these high currents.

I would not expect that the PtTi alloy would oxidize so fast but have no
basis for this assumption. For both the positioning (at the poor contrast)
and the mysterious oxygen variability I would actually run element maps.
The oxygen contents should be high enough for this. You can use the maps
then to move the stage and pick points for spot analyses and also tells you
something about the oxygen distribution (surface oxidation versus small
oxides that you mix into analyses?)

For the nitrogen it is very tricky partly due to the presence of Ti as you
already discussed it with Joe. In the detailed reports from
Bastin&Heijligers they go into details about correcting for that. Let me
know if you don't have them.

Cheers,
Anette

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Julien Allaz <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Dear microprobers,
>
> A customer recently asked me to analyze several alloys of Pt-Ti (in
> various mixture), and quantify the different Ti-Pt phases within each. In
> addition, they asked me if it was possible to analyze also O (and N). First
> importance for this job is the Ti - Pt ratio, and this light element work
> is just an “extra” if possible. So… I gave it a try... Beside the “usual”
> light element problem, I have two specific questions for you.
>
> (1) With my vintage instrument (JEOL-8600), it is very hard if not
> impossible to work on these samples at low keV (<10 keV), as I loose the
> necessary BSE contrast despite cranking up the BSE gain and adjusting for
> the contrast - and some phases in a single sample can be ~1-2 µm in size,
> they are already just barely distinguishable from the mass. Therefore I opt
> for 15 keV, a level at which the contrast is sufficient. I know… This is
> definitely not great for light element. The results can vary quite
> dramatically, notably for O, depending on the matrix correction procedure
> used (e.g., in one domain, it can vary from 0.7 to 1.2 wt-%, so not
> negligible (Calculated DetLim for O is around 320 ppm; 1sigma counting
> precision at 3% relative). Do you have any recommendation for the
> appropriate ZAF correction procedure (currently I’m using Armstrong ZAF and
> FFAST MAC table). Is it possible to have oxygen “contamination” during the
> analyses at high current (100-200 nA).
>
> (2) Results show high O-content from a few hundred ppm to above 1 wt-%.
> These measurement are repeatable within a single phase in a specific sample
> (5 analyses each, each with similar wt-% O), and in the same sample, one
> phase might have 0.9% O and the other almost nothing (100 to 1000 ppm). The
> customer has actually prepared these sample in a neutral-atmosphere (argon)
> furnace ~1 year ago. I have yet to double check if the problem could come
> from Pt Mz (3rd order! - so probably not so important, but we are speaking
> here of ~0.1-0.4 cps/nA on O Ka in the unknown [Std O Ka at 118 cps/nA])
> lines around O Ka, but I don’t see a correlation between O wt-% and Pt
> wt-%. The samples were re-polished, but I recently learnt that the customer
> only did a single 0.02 µm fine polishing, which may not have been enough to
> remove this oxidized layer?!? If you have ever worked with such alloy, do
> you think it is possible the samples have been oxidized (i.e., do Pt-Ti
> alloys oxidize easily)?
>
> About the setting: I’m using an LDE1 crystal (60 Å) for O Ka and apply an
> exponential background correction (curvature determined using WDS scan in a
> representative TiPt phase), and high current (100 - 200 nA - this further
> help my BSE detector to “see” the different phases). I opt for Ti Ka on LiF
> (lower count rate, but with high current / ~60 sec counting, the precision
> is enough) and Pt La on PET. If I drop the voltage, I would probably have
> to opt for Pt Ma (and maybe even Ti La) which raises other problems...
>
> Your help will be greatly appreciated! Thanks, and Happy Thanksgiving!!!
>
> Julien
>
>
> P.S. Let’s not worry about N, another beast… In most (90%) of the phase,
> the N-level is probably a few hundreds of ppm and with (a) the low count
> rate (3 cps/nA on BN at 15 keV… I know… way to high absorption in every
> component and low efficiency in the P-10 gas), and (b) a strong correction
> from Ti Ll (up to 100% of the signal received).
>
>
> =============================
> Dr. Julien Allaz
> Electron microprobe manager
> University of Colorado Boulder
> Dept. of Geological Sciences
> UCB 399
> 2200 Colorado Av.
> Boulder, CO 80309-0399
>
> Phone: (303) 735 2413
> Cell: (413) 210 0917
> Lab: (303) 492 5251
> Fax: (303) 492 2606
>
> Personal website: http://geoloweb.ch
> Lab website: http://geode.colorado.edu/~jallaz/
> =============================
>
>


-- 
Dr. Anette von der Handt

Department of Earth Sciences
University of Minnesota
310 Pillsbury Drive SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455

Office phone: (612) 624-7370
Office fax: (612) 625-3819
Lab phone: (612) 624-3539

****
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/listserver.html



*