Welcome to the XRF Wiki. This Wiki is a repository of information contributed by members of [email protected]. Members can view and edit the pages. The pages are currently not viewable by the public. The pages below represent a rough overview of the technology and techniques associated with X-Ray Florescence Spectroscopy as well as serving as a place for members to organize the spectra that they have contributed to the forum.?
As a starting point, the pages will be populated by information taken from member posts from the past few years - with references/attribution. Perhaps in time, these pages can be edited by members to make them more complete and less choppy. Members can also edit this page, making the structure of the content more organized.?
Pages can contain information about a particular topic, links to relevant resources (such as manuals, research papers, etc.), links to relevant forum discussions on the topic, book titles, or anything that might be useful.
What follows is very much a work in progress.
?
Adding to the Wiki
For those unfamiliar with the Wiki phenomenon, it is basically a user editable encyclopedia. The idea is that there are pages with different articles, which the user can read and also choose to edit if desired. If a piece of information is incorrect, a link outdated, or the presentation choppy or unclear, the user can just click "Edit Page" at the bottom and then fix the mistake. There is also a "Page History," so if you a user were to make a mistake or maliciously destroy a page (which wouldn't happen here) an editor can come along and restore the page to a previous version.?
If you have used MediaWiki (the engine that runs behind the scene of Wikipedia.org) you will be familiar with a certain style of creating an article. There are tags that one uses to change the formatting of the parts of the article. The Wiki on Groups.io uses a different background engine and so the standard MediaWiki syntax does not apply here. Rather, the page is edited using the same tools as one would use to compose a message on the forums. If you are a programmer or someone who likes using the tagged syntax directly, you can access the underlying page source code, be activating the advanced editing toolbar (the icon with three lines on the far right of the basic toolbar) and then clicking on the source code icon <> on the far right of the Advance Editing Toolbar. You will immediately notice that the underlying source code is HTML. Most things can be done just by using the various icons, but advanced features like table can only be implemented by manually writing the source code. (Although there are website available that will generate the source code for you through a graphical interface.)
This section describes the hardware used for XRF. We will describe the basic theory of operation of each stage in the processing tool chain and then present different commercial systems that are available as these systems are often integrated together.
[Editor note: General theory needs to be in an independent page separate from specific manufacturer information.
[Editor note - question: Should this be arranged by category, e.g detectors, preamps, etc or by manufacturer with the manufacturers product line on one page. Perhaps it's best to put a list of products with theory but the details of the products on a manufacture page...]
Detectors?- what's available, theory of operation, tradeoffs
Detector Cooling?- keeping detectors cool to avoid thermal noise and keeping the TEC from overheating
Preamps?- theory of operation, brief summary of what out there (and what not to do - such as trying to use a PMT preamp for a SiPIN diode...)
Pulse Processing Theory - high level overview of the stages of going from detector pulse to channel peaks on the computer
Commercial Systems - many commercial systems are integrated so it seems to make sense to present, for example all Amptek products together. [question: are their other affordable integrated systems besides Amptek?]
From: "taray singh via groups.io" <sukhjez@...> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 10:35:16 AM Subject: Re: [XRF] Xrf old faucet
Another thing?
The plastic mount is a tape?reel with a?hole in the center
Perfect of samples to be placed on top
The pic of the tap is without the reel
It is just an object to help me take a pic shot
In case anyone is wondering..
Taray
On Friday, November 13, 2020, 12:25 AM, GEOelectronics@... wrote:
Thanks for the interesting report. Also on the old forum a member took scraping from white deposits left in the burner of his cooking stove,
In the outside environment I take samples from cracks and crevices of rain drain grates, very good at collecting and concentrating heavy particles, too small to see.
Geo
From: "taray singh via groups.io" <sukhjez@...> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 10:17:48 AM Subject: [XRF] Xrf old faucet
Hi guys
I have done this before in the old forum
This time with better results?
My faucet spout has a??silvery shiny surface with some mottling.Blocked by water deposits due water stagnation.
But I have a confession to make
The faucet was??mounted on white rounded plaster holder at the base
On Friday, November 13, 2020, 12:25 AM, GEOelectronics@... wrote:
Thanks for the interesting report. Also on the old forum a member took scraping from white deposits left in the burner of his cooking stove,
In the outside environment I take samples from cracks and crevices of rain drain grates, very good at collecting and concentrating heavy particles, too small to see.
Geo
From: "taray singh via groups.io" <sukhjez@...> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 10:17:48 AM Subject: [XRF] Xrf old faucet
Hi guys
I have done this before in the old forum
This time with better results?
My faucet spout has a??silvery shiny surface with some mottling.Blocked by water deposits due water stagnation.
But I have a confession to make
The faucet was??mounted on white rounded plaster holder at the base
Thanks for the interesting report. Also on the old forum a member took scraping from white deposits left in the burner of his cooking stove,
In the outside environment I take samples from cracks and crevices of rain drain grates, very good at collecting and concentrating heavy particles, too small to see.
.. ?plastic holder mount. It was just perfect to align ?odd shaped samples It has been my usual practice until I discovered the hidden secrets of plastics? Taray
UO2- High Energy "Gamma Spectrum Analysis" (no exciter, looking at natural radioactivity of U-238 and now U-235 decay).
Based upon the U-235 being either of natural abundance or depleted to some extent.
Most of the atoms in the sample are U-238 and those won't??"grow" the lower daughters into secular equilibrium for a long, long time. due to the "stopper" of U-234's long half-life.
UO2- Low Energy "Gamma Spectrum Analysis" (no exciter, looking at natural radioactivity of U-238 decay).
Picture is self explanatory, as always comments, correction, questions and discussion welcomed. Notice how particles are responsible for decay, while the resulting new element's nucleus and electron shells are responsible for the electromagnetic ray signature. .mca attached.
UO2- Intro Uranium Dioxide is a man made chemical which has been used for centuries for numerous purposes. In modern times it is made quite pure, that is the uranium atoms have been removed from uranium ore with very little or no carry-over of the uranium decay chain lower daughters or other chemical elements in the rock matrix. In this context "modern times" also predates the discovery of radioactivity, as chemically separating uranium is not unlike other chemical processes, and was formally recognized in the 1700's as an element.
In post WW2 times, the feedstock of uranium for this chemical separation has moved almost exclusively to the depleted uranium (DU) byproduct of the Manhattan Engineer District et.al. since as of 2000, there were 500,000 metric tonnes of DU in storage in USA alone: ?https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/pdf/duwm01genlpaper07100r3.pdf
So pretty much by the late 1900's only prewar natural uranium (Unat) and recently made DU uranium in the form of UO2 or UO3 has been widely distributed in the civilian market.
Before we go in to the first sample analysis we should all be aware the term Depleted does not mean devoid of U-235. Technically, ANY deviation from the natural?0.711weight-% (equal to0.72atom-%)?U-235?abundance is either called Depleted or Enriched.
The sample will be first studied by Gamma Spectrum analysis using two high resolution solid state probes, the first is a Si-PIN based Amptek device with a beryllium window for low energy precision. The second is a Cadmium Telluride (CdTe) based probe, visually very similar to the first but having superior higher energy response due to the high-Z materials used in its construction. Resolution and other desirable factors are less in the CdTe than in the Si-PIN so this probe basically gives us fill-in-the-blanks information and direct access to the U-235 185keV Gamma Ray.
High quality NaI(Tl) scintillators will provide a view of certain Gamma Rays above our 400keV solid-state detector limitations.
Eu is enriched in the Petaca district rare minerals, but it is still pretty low. Most of the minerals have an average Eu2O3 of around 0.2%, as shown by microprobe analyses. Surprisingly, columbite has some of the highest concentrations of as much as 0.45%.
So your detection limit had better be pretty good.
Any
other affordable high-resolution XRF detectors?? RAP-47 is my best
at present.? Suggestions????
?
Dave -
W?LEV
?
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 7:44 PM Dude <dfemer@...> wrote:
Dave,
I doubt it. Using a 50Kv
x-ray tube the binding energy of Eu is 48.5 KeV so it’ going to get a poor
activation and because it’s a very low impurity concentration it will be hard
to see in the tube’s Compton. Sm is about the cut off for a 50 kV tube. I can see
it but it has to be nearing % level concentration.? For an Am-241 59.5 keV
source it’s theoretically possible but again due to the low concentration and
weak source it going to be a really long count and a long shot. The Eu La is
weaker yet and has lots of interferences in the 5.8 keV range.
But ya never know, test
everything as someone once said.
Question 1:? Is the amateur
XRF setup capable of determining the presence / absence of Europium in
fluorite?
Question 2:? If so, can the
amateur XRF setup determine quantitatively (within reason) whether the amount
of Eu determines the level of Fl of any given specimen?
?
Just curious - what other excuse
could I offer as not all fluorite fluoresces.?
?
Dave - W?LEV
?
On
Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 9:07 PM Ken Sejkora <kjsejkora@...>
wrote:
I’m
really enjoying all of the discussion about analyzing various materials with
XRF.? I’m quite impressed with the resolution and detail that some of you
are obtaining using your ‘amateur’ in-home laboratories.??? I
use the term “amateur” lightly – you put the efforts of my past experience in a
chemistry laboratory at a nuclear power plant to shame.? Granted, our
objective was to analyze for very specific elements of interest, primarily zinc
and cobalt, and maybe iron and chromium as well.? We had our XRF set up in
a very simplistic manner of push-button, get-banana.? We never strayed
from any elements outside of an atomic number Z-range of 24 to 30.
?
Anyway,
back to my main point of discussion.? I’ve always been a rockhound, and can’t
resist picking up something of interest.? Last year I snagged a couple of
pieces of some greenish-gray cobble stone that had some white veins of calcite
running through it.? On a lark, when it got dark, I shined my Convoy S2+
UV-LED flashlight on the stone.? I wasn’t surprised to see some red
fluorescence in the calcite, but was surprised by a relatively bright red
phosphorescence that lasted for a few tenths of a second.? What I found
even more perplexing is that this phenomenon only seemed to be evident when the
stone was illuminated with the Convoy UV flashlight.? I tried getting
fluorescence excitation with a combination longwave-shortwave Model UVSL-15
Mineralight (longwave 365 nm, shortwave 254 nm) as well as a dedicated longwave
Model UVL-56 Blak-Ray lamp (366 nm).? ?Surprisingly, I didn’t get any
appreciable fluorescence, and no phosphorescence, from either of these
mercury-vapor based lamps.? Only the LED-based flashlight seemed to elicit
the phosphorescence.
?
Now
for my question:? Would any of you fine gentlemen want to exercise the
quest for knowledge to analyze some of this mystery calcite for trace element
content to ascertain what might be leading to the phosphorescence?? Being
calcite, one would expect Calcium, Sulphur, and Oxygen, but there must be some
trace element (rare earth??) that is contributing to the fluorescence and/or
phosphorescence?? I went back to the parking lot where the crushed cobble
had been placed, and maybe only about a quarter of the cobbles I collected
exhibited fluorescence/phosphorescence.? I was able to find several chunks
of the ‘pure’ calcite (no green-gray matrix), and it too showed about a 25% to
30% of the number of pieces exhibiting fluorescence.? All of the stone
looked similar and probably came form the same quarry, but only a fraction of
it showed any fluorescence/phosphorescence.
?
Any
takers?? I’d be happy to drop a chunk or two of the “mystery” calcite in
the mail to anyone who might want to take a crack at running an XRF to look for
anything unusual.? Drop me an email if you’re interested.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 7:44 PM Dude <dfemer@...> wrote:
Dave,
I
doubt it. Using a 50Kv x-ray tube the binding energy of Eu is 48.5 KeV so it’
going to get a poor activation and because it’s a very low impurity concentration
it will be hard to see in the tube’s Compton. Sm is about the cut off for a 50
kV tube. I can see it but it has to be nearing % level concentration.? For an
Am-241 59.5 keV source it’s theoretically possible but again due to the low
concentration and weak source it going to be a really long count and a long
shot. The Eu La is weaker yet and has lots of interferences in the 5.8 keV
range.
But
ya never know, test everything as someone once said.
Question
1:? Is the amateur XRF setup capable of determining the presence / absence
of Europium in fluorite?
Question
2:? If so, can the amateur XRF setup determine quantitatively (within
reason) whether the amount of Eu determines the level of Fl of any given
specimen?
?
Just
curious - what other excuse could I offer as not all fluorite fluoresces.?
?
Dave -
W?LEV
?
On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 9:07 PM Ken Sejkora <kjsejkora@...> wrote:
I’m
really enjoying all of the discussion about analyzing various materials with
XRF.? I’m quite impressed with the resolution and detail that some of you
are obtaining using your ‘amateur’ in-home laboratories.??? I
use the term “amateur” lightly – you put the efforts of my past experience in a
chemistry laboratory at a nuclear power plant to shame.? Granted, our
objective was to analyze for very specific elements of interest, primarily zinc
and cobalt, and maybe iron and chromium as well.? We had our XRF set up in
a very simplistic manner of push-button, get-banana.? We never strayed
from any elements outside of an atomic number Z-range of 24 to 30.
?
Anyway,
back to my main point of discussion.? I’ve always been a rockhound, and
can’t resist picking up something of interest.? Last year I snagged a
couple of pieces of some greenish-gray cobble stone that had some white veins
of calcite running through it.? On a lark, when it got dark, I shined my
Convoy S2+ UV-LED flashlight on the stone.? I wasn’t surprised to see some
red fluorescence in the calcite, but was surprised by a relatively bright red
phosphorescence that lasted for a few tenths of a second.? What I found
even more perplexing is that this phenomenon only seemed to be evident when the
stone was illuminated with the Convoy UV flashlight.? I tried getting
fluorescence excitation with a combination longwave-shortwave Model UVSL-15
Mineralight (longwave 365 nm, shortwave 254 nm) as well as a dedicated longwave
Model UVL-56 Blak-Ray lamp (366 nm).? ?Surprisingly, I didn’t get any
appreciable fluorescence, and no phosphorescence, from either of these
mercury-vapor based lamps.? Only the LED-based flashlight seemed to elicit
the phosphorescence.
?
Now
for my question:? Would any of you fine gentlemen want to exercise the quest
for knowledge to analyze some of this mystery calcite for trace element content
to ascertain what might be leading to the phosphorescence?? Being calcite,
one would expect Calcium, Sulphur, and Oxygen, but there must be some trace
element (rare earth??) that is contributing to the fluorescence and/or
phosphorescence?? I went back to the parking lot where the crushed cobble
had been placed, and maybe only about a quarter of the cobbles I collected
exhibited fluorescence/phosphorescence.? I was able to find several chunks
of the ‘pure’ calcite (no green-gray matrix), and it too showed about a 25% to
30% of the number of pieces exhibiting fluorescence.? All of the stone
looked similar and probably came form the same quarry, but only a fraction of
it showed any fluorescence/phosphorescence.
?
Any
takers?? I’d be happy to drop a chunk or two of the “mystery” calcite in
the mail to anyone who might want to take a crack at running an XRF to look for
anything unusual.? Drop me an email if you’re interested.
I
doubt it. Using a 50Kv x-ray tube the binding energy of Eu is 48.5 KeV so it’
going to get a poor activation and because it’s a very low impurity concentration
it will be hard to see in the tube’s Compton. Sm is about the cut off for a 50
kV tube. I can see it but it has to be nearing % level concentration.? For an
Am-241 59.5 keV source it’s theoretically possible but again due to the low
concentration and weak source it going to be a really long count and a long
shot. The Eu La is weaker yet and has lots of interferences in the 5.8 keV
range.
But
ya never know, test everything as someone once said.
Question
1:? Is the amateur XRF setup capable of determining the presence / absence
of Europium in fluorite?
Question
2:? If so, can the amateur XRF setup determine quantitatively (within
reason) whether the amount of Eu determines the level of Fl of any given
specimen?
?
Just
curious - what other excuse could I offer as not all fluorite fluoresces.?
?
Dave -
W?LEV
?
On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 9:07 PM Ken Sejkora <kjsejkora@...> wrote:
I’m
really enjoying all of the discussion about analyzing various materials with
XRF.? I’m quite impressed with the resolution and detail that some of you
are obtaining using your ‘amateur’ in-home laboratories.??? I
use the term “amateur” lightly – you put the efforts of my past experience in a
chemistry laboratory at a nuclear power plant to shame.? Granted, our
objective was to analyze for very specific elements of interest, primarily zinc
and cobalt, and maybe iron and chromium as well.? We had our XRF set up in
a very simplistic manner of push-button, get-banana.? We never strayed
from any elements outside of an atomic number Z-range of 24 to 30.
?
Anyway,
back to my main point of discussion.? I’ve always been a rockhound, and
can’t resist picking up something of interest.? Last year I snagged a
couple of pieces of some greenish-gray cobble stone that had some white veins
of calcite running through it.? On a lark, when it got dark, I shined my
Convoy S2+ UV-LED flashlight on the stone.? I wasn’t surprised to see some
red fluorescence in the calcite, but was surprised by a relatively bright red
phosphorescence that lasted for a few tenths of a second.? What I found
even more perplexing is that this phenomenon only seemed to be evident when the
stone was illuminated with the Convoy UV flashlight.? I tried getting
fluorescence excitation with a combination longwave-shortwave Model UVSL-15
Mineralight (longwave 365 nm, shortwave 254 nm) as well as a dedicated longwave
Model UVL-56 Blak-Ray lamp (366 nm).? ?Surprisingly, I didn’t get any
appreciable fluorescence, and no phosphorescence, from either of these
mercury-vapor based lamps.? Only the LED-based flashlight seemed to elicit
the phosphorescence.
?
Now
for my question:? Would any of you fine gentlemen want to exercise the quest
for knowledge to analyze some of this mystery calcite for trace element content
to ascertain what might be leading to the phosphorescence?? Being calcite,
one would expect Calcium, Sulphur, and Oxygen, but there must be some trace
element (rare earth??) that is contributing to the fluorescence and/or
phosphorescence?? I went back to the parking lot where the crushed cobble
had been placed, and maybe only about a quarter of the cobbles I collected
exhibited fluorescence/phosphorescence.? I was able to find several chunks
of the ‘pure’ calcite (no green-gray matrix), and it too showed about a 25% to
30% of the number of pieces exhibiting fluorescence.? All of the stone
looked similar and probably came form the same quarry, but only a fraction of
it showed any fluorescence/phosphorescence.
?
Any
takers?? I’d be happy to drop a chunk or two of the “mystery” calcite in
the mail to anyone who might want to take a crack at running an XRF to look for
anything unusual.? Drop me an email if you’re interested.
Pb
and sulfur form part of the vulcanization process to give flexibility and
strength to the rubber. In plastics it softens it and makes it flexible yet still
retains its shape.
My biggest Pb
surprise was black rubber automobile and garden hose. No idea why it's there
but unmistakable....
Remember
telling me about rubber automobile before.
Couldn’t
figure out where to find one really..
Interesting..,
Do you mean a
new ?or used one.?
Perhaps it
has something to do with vulcanization of rubber?
Meanwhile
will check out my garden hose
Taray
On Monday, November 9, 2020, 10:49 PM,
GEOelectronics@... wrote:
Good
work Taray.
?
Geo
?
From:
"taray
singh via groups.io" <sukhjez@...> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 7:48:13 AM Subject: Re: [XRF] Chinese water filter analysis
?
Charles
Next
time if I am forced to use a plastic container for my XRF,I gonna opt for clear
plastic ones
Taray
On
Monday, November 9, 2020, 9:24 PM, Charles David Young
<charlesdavidyoung@...> wrote:
Hi
Taray,
?
I
was scanning a specimen that I had lazily left on its black plastic
mount.? I was seeing a clear Br peak but was told (I believe by Steve
Dubyk) that this was not likely.? With a little googling I saw that Br is
a common fire retardant in plastic.
?
I
had not realized that Pb is also common in plastic.? That is good to know
as well.
?
Charles
?
?
On
Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:57 AM taray singh via <sukhjez=[email protected]> wrote:
Hi
guys
Repeated this test with different sample setups.
MCA 's are for
Residue paper only ...dried
Residue paper with cap
Sample cap with residue paper
Clean sample paper only
Clean sample cap .
The results show
Most of scattering is from the cap
The "Pb" peaks were coming from the cap
The Fe peak is coming from the residue paper
I also put in a file about recycling plastics and heavy metals
As a whole ,I improved my settings and hope to improve further.
Will continue other testing methods.
Thanks
Taray
We
have been using thin zip lock bags for our quick and dirty soils measurements. There
is a very slight reduction in the real low energies but it doesn’t affect the
readings.
Next time if I am forced to use a plastic container for my
XRF,I gonna opt for clear plastic ones
Taray
On Monday, November 9, 2020, 9:24 PM, Charles David Young
<charlesdavidyoung@...> wrote:
Hi Taray,
?
I was scanning a specimen that I had lazily left on its
black plastic mount.? I was seeing a clear Br peak but was told (I believe
by Steve Dubyk) that this was not likely.? With a little googling I saw
that Br is a common fire retardant in plastic.
?
I had not realized that Pb is also common in plastic.?
That is good to know as well.
?
Charles
?
?
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:57 AM taray singh via <sukhjez=[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi guys
Repeated this test with different sample setups.
MCA 's are for
Residue paper only ...dried
Residue paper with cap
Sample cap with residue paper
Clean sample paper only
Clean sample cap .
The results show
Most of scattering is from the cap
The "Pb" peaks were coming from the cap
The Fe peak is coming from the residue paper
I also put in a file about recycling plastics and heavy metals
As a whole ,I improved my settings and hope to improve further.
Will continue other testing methods.
Thanks
Taray
Hi guys
Repeated this test with different sample setups.
MCA 's are for
Residue paper only ...dried
Residue paper with cap
Sample cap with residue paper
Clean sample paper only
Clean sample cap .
The results show
Most of scattering is from the cap
The "Pb" peaks were coming from the cap
The Fe peak is coming from the residue paper
I also put in a file about recycling plastics and heavy metals
As a whole ,I improved my settings and hope to improve further.
Will continue other testing methods.
Thanks
Taray
Pretty
much the same thing but with a twist. It occurs with the valance band outer most
electrons in atoms, molecules and crystals. In this case it’s a crystal center
with an activator element of low concentration. The energy required to get an
excited state in the visible 400 to 680 nm range ?is 1.8 to 3.1 eV. That can be
by photons, protons and electrons just like XRF but the energy levels are much
lower and act on the outer shells. The twist is the crystal center needs an
activator element defect to get the energy transfer for fluorescence rather
than heating. The emission wavelength can be dependent on the excitation
wavelength.
Dud, are all these wavelength shifts happening for the same
reason as XRF but at longer wavelengths and instead of inner orbitals, use the
outer orbitals, or is it a crystal thing (or both). Either way it is an
electron thing correct?
Remember telling me about rubber automobile before.
Couldn’t figure out where to find one really.."
OK here's a confession. Look behind a automobile epair garage or oil change business, for scraps thrown away. Also Here in US we have car parts stores, where they cut rubber hose to length. Sometimes they have a very short new piece ready to be thrown away, Mine is definitely a used on, less than 1 inch long, Maybe 1/4" diameter and I cut it into 2 pieces for testing. Much (if not most) of what I test is scraps, some include floor swipes with a cotton Q-tip.
From: "taray singh via groups.io" <sukhjez@...> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 10:01:16 AM Subject: Re: [XRF] Chinese water filter analysis
Geo
My biggest Pb surprise was black rubber automobile and garden hose. No idea why it's there but unmistakable....
Remember telling me about rubber automobile before.
Couldn’t figure out where to find one really..
Interesting..,
Do you mean a new ?or used one.?
Perhaps it has something to do with vulcanization of rubber?
Meanwhile will check out my garden hose
Taray
On Monday, November 9, 2020, 10:49 PM, GEOelectronics@... wrote:
Good work Taray.
Geo
From: "taray singh via groups.io" <sukhjez@...> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 7:48:13 AM Subject: Re: [XRF] Chinese water filter analysis
Charles
Next time if I am forced to use a plastic container for my XRF,I gonna opt for clear plastic ones
Taray
On Monday, November 9, 2020, 9:24 PM, Charles David Young <charlesdavidyoung@...> wrote:
Hi Taray,
I was scanning a specimen that I had lazily left on its black plastic mount.? I was seeing a clear Br peak but was told (I believe by Steve Dubyk) that this was not likely.? With a little googling I saw that Br is a common fire retardant in plastic.
I had not realized that Pb is also common in plastic.? That is good to know as well.
Charles
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:57 AM taray singh via <sukhjez=[email protected]> wrote:
Hi guys Repeated this test with different sample setups. MCA 's are for Residue paper only ...dried Residue paper with cap Sample cap with residue paper Clean sample paper only Clean sample cap . The results show Most of scattering is from the cap The "Pb" peaks were coming from the cap The Fe peak is coming from the residue paper I also put in a file about recycling plastics and heavy metals As a whole ,I improved my settings and hope to improve further. Will continue other testing methods. Thanks Taray
