Premium
Comparison of portable and stationary x‐ray fluorescence spectrometers in the study of ancient metallic artefacts
Author(s) -
Guilherme A.,
Cavaco A.,
Pessanha S.,
Costa M.,
Carvalho M. L.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
x‐ray spectrometry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.447
H-Index - 45
eISSN - 1097-4539
pISSN - 0049-8246
DOI - 10.1002/xrs.1016
Subject(s) - spectrometer , x ray fluorescence , detector , optics , excitation , materials science , fluorescence , analytical chemistry (journal) , physics , chemistry , chromatography , quantum mechanics
The aim of this work is to compare the performance of two x‐ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometers, a portable one and a non‐portable one, in order to evaluate the advantages and drawbacks of each system. The used spectrometers are not commercial, and in both cases the excitation beams are produced by x‐ray tubes and the detection systems are based on common detectors. The portable system is a 90° geometry between the incident and the emitted beams, and the stationary spectrometer is based on a triaxial geometry with a secondary target. Detection limits are compared for a metallic Cu alloy reference material. A case study for ancient metallic artefacts of Cu‐based alloys, is used to compare the performance of both spectrometers. With the portable spectrometer several tests were carried out using two modes: an ‘unfiltered’ and a ‘filtered’ one in order to evaluate the best peak/background ratio for the studied samples. The obtained results showed significant differences between the two systems, namely, in what concerns peak shaping and trace elements detection. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.