Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:08:17.819Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fundamental parameters analysis of RoHS elements in plastics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2012

W. T. Elam ,
Robert B. Shen ,
Bruce Scruggs  and
Joseph A. Nicolosi
W. T. Elam
Affiliation:
EDAX, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey 70430
Robert B. Shen
Affiliation:
EDAX, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey 70430
Bruce Scruggs
Affiliation:
EDAX, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey 70430
Joseph A. Nicolosi
Affiliation:
EDAX, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey 70430
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

European Community Directive 2002∕95∕EC restricts the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment. In particular, restrictions are placed on lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, and bromine (in polybrominated biphenyls or polybrominated diphenyl ethers). XRF is a convenient method for detecting the presence and measuring the amounts of these elements. Reliably quantifying all of these elements in plastics typically requires a large number of standards that are not yet readily available. Because of the light element matrix, using a “standardless” fundamental parameters method requires some reliance on the primary beam scatter, complicating the analysis algorithm and increasing the uncertainty. We have tested a simplified fundamental parameters method that determines the matrix via difference, requiring only one standard. The method was tested on a series of reference materials containing all of the regulated elements in a variety of plastic resins. One multi-element reference standard was used. It was necessary to include all of the additives in the specimens to achieve good quantitative accuracy. In addition, the scattered primary intensity was used in one set of tests to compensate for variations in specimen thickness. This thickness compensation was necessary to get acceptable results for Cd. Results were very promising, with average relative errors and relative standard deviations of about 10%.

Keywords

fundamental parametersX-ray fluorescenceRoHSRayleigh scatterCompton scatter
Type
X-Ray Fluorescence
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , June 2007 , pp. 142 - 145
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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

Brusa, D., Stutz, G., Riveros, J. A., Fernández-Varea, J. M., and Salvat, F. (1996). “Fast sampling algorithm for the simulation of photon Compton scattering,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. ANIMAER10.1016/0168-9002(96)00652-3 379, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elam, W. T., Shen, R. B., Scruggs, B., and Nicolosi, J. (2004). “Accuracy of standardless FP analysis of bulk and thin film samples using a new atomic database,” Adv. X-Ray Anal.AXRAAA 47, 104–109.Google Scholar
Kissel, L. (2000). “RTAB: the Rayleigh scattering database,” Radiat. Phys. Chem.RPCHDM10.1016/S0969-806X(00)00290-5 59, 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaChance, G. R. and Claisse, F. (1995). Quantitative X-ray Fluorescence Analysis: Theory and Application (Wiley, Chichister, United Kingdom), p. 87.Google Scholar
Lamberty, A., Van Borm, W., and Quevauviller, Ph. (2001). “The Certification of Mass Fraction of As, Br, Cd, Cl, Hg, Pb, and S in Two Polyethylene CRMs,” Report EUR 19450 EN, (Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements, Geel, Belgium), 〈http://www.erm-crm.org/pdf/reports/EC681.pdf〉.Google Scholar
van Sprang, H. A. and Bekkers, M. H. J. (1998). “Determination of light elements using x-ray spectrometry. Part I—Analytical implications of using scattered tube lines,” X-Ray Spectrom.XRSPAX 27, 31–36.3.0.CO;2-#>CrossRefGoogle Scholar