Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T14:05:04.654Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reinvestigation of the M Emission Spectrum of Uranium-92

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 March 2011

Jan Dellith ,
Andy Scheffel ,
Ralf Terborg  and
Michael Wendt
Jan Dellith
Affiliation:
Institute of Photonic Technology, Albert-Einstein-Str. 9, D-07745 Jena, Germany
Andy Scheffel
Affiliation:
Institute of Photonic Technology, Albert-Einstein-Str. 9, D-07745 Jena, Germany
Ralf Terborg
Affiliation:
BRUKER NANO GmbH, Schwarzschildstrasse 12, D-12489 Berlin, Germany
Michael Wendt*
Affiliation:
Institute of Photonic Technology, Albert-Einstein-Str. 9, D-07745 Jena, Germany
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The M spectrum of the element uranium was reinvestigated by using both high-resolution wavelength dispersive (WD) spectrometry as well as energy dispersive (ED) spectrometry. Thereby we observed relative intensities that deviate from data in the literature. These discrepancies were not only observed for the weak U M lines but also for major lines. By measuring the Mα,β region of the spectrum with a PET crystal in second-order reflection, a sufficient energy resolution was achieved to separate Mα2 (M5N6) from Mα1 (M5N7). The intensity ratio I(M5N6)/I(M5N7) was determined to be approximately 5%, which is in strong contrast to the data tabulated by White and Johnson [White, E.W. & Johnson, G.G. (1970). X-Ray and Absorption Wavelengths and Two-Theta Tables. ASTM Data Series DS37A, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials]. Furthermore M5N7 was clearly observed as the strongest of the M lines that disagrees with data presented by Kleykamp [Kleykamp, H. (1981). Wavelengths of the M X-ray spectra of uranium, neptunium, plutonium, and americium. Z Naturforsch36a, 1388–1390], who reported Mβ (M4N6) as the strongest line. Also, after White and Johnson (1970), the line M2N4 should be more intense than M3O5 by a factor of 5. Both our WD and ED spectra show clearly that M3O5 is stronger than M2N4. Altogether, we observed in our WD spectra 26 M lines. In some cases untypical large differences between the line energies given by Bearden [Bearden, J.A. (1967). X-ray wavelengths. Rev Mod Phys39, 78–124] and measured by us were observed.

Keywords

X-ray spectrometryelectron microprobe analysiswavelength dispersive spectrometrysilicon drift detector (SDD)uraniumM emission spectrumrelative intensities
Type
Material Applications
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 296 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2011

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

REFERENCES

Bearden, J.A. (1967). X-ray wavelengths. Rev Mod Phys 39, 78–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bearden, J.A. & Burr, A.F. (1967). Reevaluation of X-ray atomic energy levels. Rev Mod Phys 39, 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burger, H.C. & Dorgelo, H.B. (1924). Beziehung zwischen inneren Quantenzahlen und Intensitäten von Mehrfachlinien. ZS f Phys 23, 258–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cauchois, Y. & Senemaud, C. (1978). Wavelengths of X-Ray Emission Lines and Absorption Edges. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Dellith, J. & Wendt, M. (2007). The M emission spectrum of 68Erbium. Microsc Microanal 13, 191–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, J., Newbury, D., Joy, D., Lyman, C., Echlin, P., Lifshin, E., Sawyer, L. & Michael, J. (2003). Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis, 3rd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleykamp, H. (1981). Wavelengths of the M X-ray spectra of uranium, neptunium, plutonium, and americium. Z Naturforsch 36a, 1388–1390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, E. (1928). Röntgenspektroskopische Messungen der M-Serie der Elemente Uran bis Gadolinium. ZS f Phys 50, 82–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, E. (1931). The M- and N-series—A spectroscopic study of X-rays. Nova Acta Reg Soc Sc Ups Ser 4 7(7), 3–75.Google Scholar
Reed, S.J.B. (1993). Electron Probe Microanalysis, 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Siegbahn, M. (1916). Über eine weitere Reihe (M-Reihe) in den Hochfrequenz-spektren der Elemente. Verh d D Phys Ges 18, 278–282.Google Scholar
Siegbahn, M. (1931). Spektroskopie der Röntgenstrahlen. Berlin: Verlag von Julius Springer. Zweite umgearbeitete Auflage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, C. (1998). Electron probe microanalysis of irradiated nuclear fuel: An overview. J Anal At Spectrom 14, 447–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, E.W. & Johnson, G.G. (1970). X-Ray and Absorption Wavelengths and Two-Theta Tables. ASTM Data series DS37A, 2nd ed. West Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zschornack, G. (2007). Handbook of X-Ray Data. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar