There are quite of numbers of instrument to perform elemental analysis such as EDX, XRF, etc. What are the pro and con?
Recently I noticed that there are high percentage of an element for C and O from student's sample which is supposed the ratio should be much lower. I believe C is from Carbon Tape that attaches to the stub. And O mostly from an environment. However, I very doubt about this. What if the sample is activated carbon (powder form), I'm afraid the percentage of C will be not accurate. The instrument that I used is SEM QuantaFei. Should I double check by sending the sample for XRF analysis?
If you are interested in quantification of C and O in a bulk specimen, then EDS is one of the worst methods.
As Vladimir says, C and O by SEM/EDX is difficult. Also you will not gain anything from trying XRF as it is using basically the same technique, I would say that for C and O it is worse. Trying to quantify light elements by using X-rays is a pretty bad idea. It is not impossible but it needs a high level of expertise, good hardware and sophisticated software.
What about CHNS/O ANALYSIS, it can be done to determine the percentage of the carbon and the oxygen in the samples.
??
Still you could try it.
Modern EDX works well to me, FYI.
The comments were of interest!!!
On a powder, I would not analyze Carbon or Oxygen with WDXRF or EDXRF. The analysis volume is too small and you have major preparation and representativity problems. It only works suitably well in some special cases, like Oxygen in "Aluminium bath ratio sample" or Carbon in steel. XRF is the wrong technique for general analysis of C & O.
I think a combustion analysis would be more suitable for Carbon (and maybe Oxygen too), but I'm no expert in that field.
Dear All,
Thank you for valuable answer and recommendation. Really appreciated that! :)
What is the recommended technique then to measure C and O in powders?
- Badges
- Science topic