Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T08:03:33.033Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Reduction of Matrix Effects in X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis by the Monte Carlo, Fundamental Parameters Method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

R. P. Gardner  and
J. M. Doster
R. P. Gardner
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering North Carolina State University Raleigh, North Carolina 27650
J. M. Doster
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering North Carolina State University Raleigh, North Carolina 27650
Get access

Abstract

A review of the application of the Monte Carlo, fundamental parameters method to XRF fluorescence analysis for the reduction of matrix effects is made. The analytical solutions arising from theoretical equations are given along with the restrictive assumptions that are necessary to this approach. The extensions of the fundamental parameters method by the Monte Carlo simulation to practical situations that require much less restrictive assumptions are outlined. The average angle approach to the use of the analytical solutions is investigated by comparison with the Monte Carlo method. Future extensions of the fundamental parameters method by the Monte Carlo approach are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in X-Ray Analysis , Volume 22: Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, August 1-4, 1978 , 1978 , pp. 343 - 356
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Criss, J. W. and Birks, L. S., “Calculation Methods for Fluorescent X-Ray Spectrometry”, Analytical Chemistry, 40, 1080-1086 (1968).Google Scholar
2. docker, K. and Schreiber, H., “Quantitative rontgen-spekralanalyze mit Kalterregung des spectrums”, Annals of Physics, 85, 1087(1928).Google Scholar
3. Gillam, E. and Heal, H. T., “Some Problems in the Analysis of Steels by X-Ray Fluorescence”, British Journal of Applied Physics, 3, 353 (1952).Google Scholar
4. Sherman, J., “The Theoretical Derivation of Fluorescent X-Ray Intensities from Mixtures”, Spectrochimica Acta, 7, 283–306(1955).Google Scholar
5. Sherman, J., “Simplification of a Formula in the Correlation of Fluorescent X-Ray Intensities from Mixtures”, Spectrochimica Acta, 15, 466–470(1959).Google Scholar
6. Shiraiwa, T. and Fujino, N., “Theoretical Calculation of Fluorescent X-Ray Intensities in Fluorescent X-Ray Spectrochemical Analysis”, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, 5, 886–899(1966).Google Scholar
7. Shiraiwa, T. and Fujino, N., “Theoretical Calculation of Fluorescent X-Ray Intensities of Nickel-Iron-Chromium Ternary Alloys”, Bulletin of the Chemical Society of Japan, 4, 2289-2296(1967).Google Scholar
8. Gardner, R. P. and Hawthorne, A. R., “Monte Carlo Simulation of the X-Ray Fluorescence Excited by Discrete Energy Photons in Homogeneous Samples”, X-Ray Spectrometry, 4, 138–148(1975).Google Scholar
9. Hawthorne, A. R. and Gardner, R. P., “Monte Carlo Simulation of X-Ray Fluorescence from Homogeneous Multielement Samples Excited by Continuous and Discrete Energy Photons from X-Ray Tubes”, Analytical Chemistry, 47, 2220-2225(1975).Google Scholar
10. Hawthorne, A R. and Gardner, R. P., “Monte Carlo Models for the Inverse Calculation of Multielement Amounts in XRF Analysis,” Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, Supplement No. 3, 21, 38–39(1975).Google Scholar
11. Hawthrone, A. R., Gardner, R. P., and Dzubay, T. G., “Monte Carlo Simulation of Self-Absorption Effects in Elemental XRF Analysis of Atmospheric Particulates Collected on Filters”, in Gould, R. W., Barrett, C. S., Newkirk, J. B., and Ruud, C. O., Editors, Advances in X-Ray Analysis, 19, p.323–337, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company (1976).Google Scholar
12. Hawthorne, A. R. and Gardner, R. P., “Fundamental Parameters Solution to the X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Nickel-Iron-Chromium Alloys Including Tertiary Corrections”, Analytical Chemistry, 48, 2130-2135(1976).Google Scholar
13. Hawthorne, A. R. and Gardner, R. P., “Monte Carlo A-plications to the X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Aerosol Samples” in Dzubay, T. G., Editor, X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Environmental Samples, p. 209–220, Ann Aobor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor (1977).Google Scholar
14. Gardner, R. P. and Wielopolski, L., “Adaptation of the Fundamental Parameters Monte Carlo Simulation Method to EDXRF Analysis with Secondary Fluorescer X-Ray Machines”, in Barrett, C. S., Leyden, D. E., Newkirk, J. B., and Ruud, C. O., Editors, Advances in X-Ray Analysis, 21, p.129–142, Plenum Press (1978).Google Scholar
15. Gardner, R. P., Wielopolski, L., and Verghese, K.,“Application of Selected Mathematical Techniques to Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis”, Atomic Energy Review, 15,(4),701–754(1977) (1977).Google Scholar
16. Gardner, R. P., Wielopolski, L., and Verghese, K., “Mathematical Techniques for Quantitative Elemental Analysis by Energy Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence”, Journal of Radioanalytical Chemistry, 43,611–643 (1978).Google Scholar
17. Shaeffer, N. M., Editor, Reactor Shielding for Nuclear Engineers, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Office of Information Services (1973).Google Scholar
18. Hammersly, J. M. and Handscomb, D. C., Monte Carlo Methods, John Wiley&Sons, Inc. (1964).Google Scholar
19. Carter, L. L. and Cashwell, E. D., “Particle-Transport Simulation with the Monte Carlo Method,”TlD-26607 Technical Information Center, ter, Office of Public Affairs, US Energy Research and Development Administration (1975).Google Scholar