¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io
  1. XRF
  2. Messages
Single Messages Topics Expanded Polls

Re: DppMCA vs Theremino

 

Thanks, George.

Regarding the possibility of confusing Nb peaks with others, the precise alignment of all available emission lines for Nb pretty much eliminates this.? Attached is the same scan with pure Nb element superimposed.? I enabled the ULb2 line and there is really no confusion.? In addition, there is no U emission line even close to the NbKb1.

BTW I looked at FitzPeaks and it looks interesting.? For my own purposes though having the sources is indispensable.

Charles


On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 10:15 AM <GEOelectronics@...> wrote:
Nice presentation Charles, thanks, and in only a few minutes- that's good. Wow, that Si-PIN really gives a ton of data points.

One suggestion, make duplicate run, without exciter. Make sure Nb peaks are not being shammed by Uranium upper daughter's X-Ray peaks from normal radioactive decay. That one bit me bigtime, all the way back to the first silicon detector experiments in 2013. We hashed that out here and fully explained that effect, but it was a team effort...¡­..thanks to you and Dud and others that is crystal clear now.

I've been doing amateur XRF and Gamma Spec for a long time. For 99.9% of that time the mantra was- stable elements get XRF'ed, radioactive elements get Gamma Spectrum Analyzed.

This year is the first time I've tried XRF'ing radioactive elements, following your lead on that.

Geo>K0FF

ThereminoMCA_Amptek_DppMCA_Si-PIN_fergusonite_Nb_White_Cloud_CO.png

Join [email protected] to automatically receive all group messages.