AN ANALYTICAL XRAY SERVICES LABORATORY
Feel free to call us: 940-784-3002

Clay minerology is a fascinating subset of the common powder XRD applications we work with. It seems like every lab has their own unique way of handling the various challenges presented by clays and hence the need for myriad solutions. Most recently we worked with a lab which processes large volumes of clay samples in their various Bruker XRD system and they needed a sample holder that would accommodate their 26 x 26mm glass slides on which their clays are mounted. The solution was a custom holder with a square recess for the plate which is simple enough, but in cases like this, one must take into account the real-world challenges of machining as well as usage. The edges and corners of the glass slides are the least precise part of the plate so the holder has a “moat” around the perimeter to eliminate binding or shifting due to those issues. The center is also relieved as this area does almost nothing to improve precision of the mount, but will cause dramatic displacement errors if any debris gets between the holder and plate in that area.

These were a little time-consuming to make, but the end result worked beautifully. The client was very happy and we’re happy to have another design to offer to other labs with similar needs.

 

I’ve spent time in hundreds of different businesses over the last 20 years as I traveled around the country working in labs and it’s given me a strong appreciation for the concept of “workplace culture”. It’s not really a spectrum in the sense that there are extremes on each end and compromise in the middle, but more like “culture” in the truest sense of the word. It’s a complicated system of expectations, relationships, and accomplishments. Obviously some of these systems “work” and others… Not so much.

I like to think we do pretty well at KSA and Texray. Mainly because, after many years of experimentation, I’ve come to the conclusion that I can’t change people (surprise!). An old friend at a major manufacturer of X-ray instrumentation once commented to me that when he hired a new tech, he’d know within a month if they were going to last. My first thought was that it would take longer than a month to make the new hire into the tech you needed, but I realize now that his statement embodied the same lesson it would take me years to learn. You can train, reward, chastise and incentivize all you want, but the people you hire are either right for your group or they’re not.

Around here we have easy days and hard days. It comes with the territory, but I think everyone knows that they’re appreciated and supported in what they do. Individual projects are encouraged and we try to loosen up enough to have fun without compromising performance. Behind it all is a sense of pride in the fact that we work very hard to surpass the expectations of our clients.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted by: In: Uncategorized 21 Jun 2017 0 comments Tags: , ,

KS Analytical Systems and Texray Laboratory Services are deeply invested in the future of science and technology in the USA. We work with undergraduate, graduate and post-doc students regularly and encourage them as much as possible with support through Texray as well as technical information. Watching XRD and XRF users in higher education develop and test their ideas is always interesting, but these are not the students who are being lost from STEM fields. The battleground for the engineers, chemists, and physicists of tomorrow is happening at a much younger age so we’re always looking for opportunities to support teachers who are working to show their students that these fields are not just endless equations and tedious experiments.

With the whole country waking up to the need for more STEM graduates, there’s no shortage of organizations and competitions set up to give kids a chance to get their hands dirty with technology. We started out by sponsoring a local high school robotics team and, most recently, a high school team entered in the NASA Human Exploration Rover Challenge. The video below is from last year and I love how they describe their early failures and determination to improve. These are not your ordinary shop-class kids. Most had never used even basic hand tools. This competition put them completely outside their comfort zone.

The 2017 competition brought new challenges and more restrictive design constraint intended to push the teams further into the realm of custom components. The obvious answer for most of these vehicles had been common bicycle wheels and tires from the beginning. Their light weight and high strength make them very attractive, but taking the easy way out is not what being an engineer, let alone a NASA engineer, is all about. Using the equipment and capabilities at hand the Parish Episcopal team developed a wheel that took everyone by surprise (including myself). Multiple layers of cardboard were sandwiched together and coated in a polymer bed-liner material intended for pickup trucks. The toothed pattern of the cardboard layers created exceptional traction and the rubber coating made them extremely durable. The 2017 rover was not without its weaknesses, but these wheels were a subject of interest to everyone from the spectators to the organizers. Parish fielded two teams which finished 26th and 27th out of a 99 team field which included universities and high schools from all over the world.

The first video is from a TED talk given by two of the older students in the program from 2016. The second is from the 2017 competition and includes some race footage.

I spend a great deal of time meeting with XRD and XRF users throughout the year, but usually in the context of some problem or time-sensitive project. Luckily I’ve been able to attend the Denver X-ray Conference fairly consistently over the last few years. It’s a great time to catch up with other users who are as deeply invested in X-ray spectroscopy and crystallographic analysis as we are. The vendors always put on a great show in the exhibit hall and poster sessions.

The first three days of the week are filled with technical workshops focused on an array of topics. There are always some introductory classes for both XRD and XRF for new users to attend and then there will be additional topics which are usually more advanced. The educational opportunities alone are well worth the attendance fee. Each session is run by an expert in the field and questions, even from industrial users, are welcomed. The sessions are strictly non-sales oriented as well which lends the event a very egalitarian feeling. See the full program here.

Plenary sessions and more sales-oriented meetings occur later in the week and are a great way to get a feel for the cutting edge technology being released by the various vendors. The exhibit hall opens a few days into the conference so everyone has a few days to see all the different booths. We always spend a great deal of time at the Materials Data, Inc and Bruker-AXS booths in particular.

The conference moves between Westminster, CO just North of Denver, Chicago, IL and Big Sky, MT. I’ve never made the trek up to Big Sky, but I hear it’s beautiful. Some attendees only come when it’s up there.

I’d love to connect with as many of our readers as possible so contact us if you’ll be there and I’ll be sure to see you while I’m at DXC-Big Sky!

A great many factors affect the quality of data one can collect on any given instrument, but there are times when simply holding the aliquot is a major hurdle. We spend a great deal of time working out the best ways to hold odd samples and even create custom hardware to do so in some cases. Click here for some of our other posts related to the various sample holders we work with. Choosing the best sample holder for a given project is one thing, but there are also times when a completely different stage is required.

The most common stage is the simple, single sample stage. This relies on three pins to define the plane of diffraction. The sample holder is pressed against these pins by a spring loaded plunger beneath it.

The dreaded “amorphous” hump created by x-rays scattering off plastic sample holders has plagued XRD users for decades. It’s a serious enough problem that we make a good volume of these holders from Aluminum which works very well for loose powders. The plastic scatters xrays at around 13 degrees 2Theta (Cu anode tube) which make a real mess of most geological patterns and isn’t fun to model out for Rietveld refinement. Zero background holders like our ZBH-32 work wonderfully in standard sample stages designed for a single sample at a time, but the large plate isn’t compatible with the autosampler.

 

I recently had a request for a hybrid holder which would allow for analysis of very small volumes of materials while retaining compatibility with the autosampler. This is almost identical to our standard powder holders, but with a well designed specifically for our small ZBH plate.

Key features include:

  • 6061-T6 Al material (anodized or as-machined)
  • Si(510) plate
  • Raised sample well minimizes the area of the sample holder in the plane of diffraction. (Original Siemens design)
  • Beveled well walls minimize the area of Al in the plane of diffraction
  • Other small modifications are made to improve reliability of these holders in the autosampler

One of the fundamental facts of lab-based X-ray production is that our x-ray tubes emit much more than the pure KA1 lines we rely on for material characterization and quantification. Most XRD users are familiar with techniques and hardware for the reduction or elimination of KB1, W LA1 and Bremsstrahlung, but take for granted the inseparable pair of KA1 and KA2 (referred to as the “doublet”). Luckily for us, these energies are present in strict proportion such that we can factor their paired presence into most XRD analysis to the point that one might barely notice their effect. However, the fact remains that we will see peak broadening at lower angles and completely independent additional peaks at higher angles due to this superfluous discrete emission.

Separating the doublet cannot be accomplished electronically or through absorption/attenuation such as might be effective for KB1 energies. It must be done in the primary-beam with an additional diffraction event. Primary-beam monochromators are generally classified by the number of diffraction events required for a photon to pass completely through the device. Single-bounce, 2-bounce and 4-bounce geometries are common with the latter providing the best energy resolution allbeit the lowest intensity (photon flux). My limited experience suggests that while the single-bounce models retain enough intensity to have some application in powder XRD, the others are relegated to HR-XRD applications such as XRR.

The alignment for any of this hardware is not for the faint of heart as it begins with coarse adjustments using fluorescent screens in the beam path. This was essential for us given how dramatically misaligned the monochromator had become after so many attempts to bring it back into operation. We actually needed our SDD system to verify that we were tuning for Cu KA1 energy rather than the KB1 emissions because some of the most basic aspects of the alignment had pushed way beyond their intended position.

Along the way we built ourselves a motorized remote adjustment tool which we’ll return to the user as small adjustments are required on a regular basis with this kind of monochromator to retain maximum intensity. It’s quite useful and even versatile enough to allow for the adjustment of multiple control knobs.

One final note regarding intensity. It’s easy to get excited about energy resolution like this, but bear in mind that we’re looking at ~20x reduction in intensity due to the inherent losses involved in the primary diffraction event. This data was collected at 10x the normal speed and at half the normal 2Theta step increment so it looks very good, but one would need a compelling reason to slow their data collection this much.

Another side effect of performing your energy discrimination in the primary beampath is that other issues such as fluorescence effects (incident x-rays exciting elements in the sample causing high background intensities) are harder to avoid than they would be with a diffracted-beam monochromator. The 4x reduction in intensity inherent in the diffracted-beam monochromatization makes it a poor choice to eliminate these effects when the incident intensities are already so low. We recommend energy-dispersive detectors such as our SDD-150 to eliminate extraneous energies without sacrificing net intensity. We’ve also worked with the Bruker LynxEye XE-T detector which has a very high energy resolution compared to other position sensitive detectors (PSD). Contact KS Analytical Systems for more information on these options.

FCT 0027 Xray decal visual croppedWe’ve been working with XRD machines for about 40 years now and to be quite honest, very little has changed. Most of the really exciting advancements have been software based, but there have certainly been changes to the hardware as well. We’ve introduced a few ourselves such as the KSA-SDD-150 detector. Automatic anti-scatter and divergence slits, additional axes and degrees of control have all increase the versatility of these instruments and opened them up to more advanced and unique experiments, but nothing has had an effect matching the new crop of Position Sensitive Detector (PSD). These have been around for decades, but didn’t really become popular until the a solid state version was introduced. There are still some trade-offs as mentioned in our KSA-SDD-150 post, but when you need speed, a PSD is the way to go.

Until recently, the only option for clients looking for this kind of speed was either a new XRD or a refurbished Bruker D8 system with a LynxEye or Vantec-1. While the D8 is a great machine and the LynxEye is a world class detector, the cost is usually too much for academic or small labs to bear. This has all been changing recently with the introduction of a truly aftermarket detector system from FCT ACTech. No other company that we’re aware of has worked so hard to make their hardware as turnkey as possible so the user isn’t left holding a box of parts and an instruction manual.

We can now offer detector upgrades for D5000 Theta/Theta and D5000 T2T systems with kits soon to be available for D500 systems as well. Software integration with DiffracPlus (standard software for Bruker XRD systems) is seamless and full integration with MDI Datascan is very close to completion. The future is very bright for users of these XRD systems.

Contact us for more information on these detectors


NovaculitesiliconKey features:

  • Data collection at 30x the speed of a standard point detector.
  • Dramatic increase in throughput
  • Plug-and-play retrofit
  • Maintenance free (no gas charge required)
  • Stand-alone operation for custom experiments
  • Excellent angular resolution

 

Technical Specifications:

  • Maximum count rate: 500Kcps / pixcel, 50Mcps global
  • Maximum scanning speed: 120 deg/min
  • Angular resolution: 0.06 deg at 200mm radius
  • Strip pitch: 120um
  • Number of channels: 96
  • Angular span: 3.3 degrees
  • Energy resolution: <10%
  • Energy range: 4.5KeV to 17KeV, efficiency at 30KeV is 10%
  • Compatible with all common XRD tube anodes including Cr, Fe, Co, Cu, Mo and W.

The majority of the samples we receive come in volumes high enough to completely fill the well in any of our standard sample holders. Some are too large or oddly shaped which calls for a special holding solution like those listed here, but many are simply very small quantities of powder. Placing these in a standard holder would leave them well outside the plane of diffraction and provide terrible data, not to mention substantial scatter
or diffracted background from whatever the powder is placed on. The answer is a zero background sample holder (ZBH). Most our users at KS Analytical Systems run the original Siemens/Bruker plates, but others are using Si(100) and even glass substrates. We’re very happy to say that
we’re able to offer a direct replacement for these with our new ZBH-32 holders. These fit most Siemens XRD systems and can be customized for use in most any other system. Contact us for more information on this. The scan below shows the data collected from a single mg of Silicon 640B standard powder spread across a ZBH.

Off Planar Quartz ZBH w-1mg 640B

Full scan of 1mg Silicon 640B standard spread across a ZBH

ZBH-32

ZBH-32 sample holders mounted for Siemens and Bruker single sample stages.

 

Some users report acceptable results using simple glass plates. While there are serious caveats here, it may be a reasonable solution for some users. The issue with amorphous glass is not diffracted peaks in the background, but rather, scatter off the surface. X-ray scattering off a surface is inversely proportional to the average atomic number of that material. That is to say, the lighter the matrix, the more efficiently it will scatter X-rays. This is why we use a pure Graphite sample to characterize the emission spectra of our XRF instrumentation. The glass sample shows the expected scatter “hump” starting at a very low angle and it doesn’t flatten until nearly 100°2Θ. While some of this can be modeled and subtracted with good profile fitting software like Jade 2010, it can be challenging to match the data quality of a good ZBH. We’re working on a series of videos to guide new users through some of these features, but on-site training classes are also available.

 

Glass plate

Amorphous glass empty

Glass-Qtz-Si510 overlay

Glass, ZBH-32 and off-planar quartz scans overlayed for comparison

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Several of our customers in the geological industry use standard Si(100) wafers. These can be a great solution, but again have serious drawbacks for some applications. The Si(100) material creates diffracted peaks which are very sharp and therefore easier to model out sometimes, but also very high as the material is monocrystalline. The scan below shows what happens when one tries to run a normal scan across a bare plate. The largest peaks are actually only one or two which have over loaded the detector and caused it to drop out. All of these scans were collected with our SDD-150 which can handle up to 1×10^6 cps, but for the sake of good comparison, we left it tuned as it would be for a standard pattern. The monocrystalline nature of this material causes big problems, but it also allows for a creative solution. See the second scan for the results of the same measurement with the plate angled 1 degree off of theoretical. With this geometry, it’s unlikely this would affect the data quality dramatically, but the offending peaks are drastically diminished.

 

Si-100 wafer

Si-100 empty

Si-100 locked vs unlocked

Si-100 standard vs skewed scan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Off-planar Quartz holders have been the industry standard for decades. Historically, these have been made from solid, monocrystalline quartz material cut at a specific angle (6° off the C axis if I’m not mistaken). While these work well, they can be inconsistent. Even some of the OEM holders we’ve tested have shown some peaks which we can’t explain. Talking to some very experienced crystallographers, we find that they’ve had similar experiences.

 

 

Off Planar Quartz ZBH

Off-planar Quartz empty

ZBH-32 empty

ZBH-32 empty

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We’ve been looking for a better answer for several years, but there are few off-the-shelf materials which work as well as off-planar quartz. The ideal answer was to cut solid Si(100) oriented billets such that the face presented to the diffractometer had no d-spacings which would diffract in the normal range of these machines. This is not unlike the off-planar Quartz method, but the starting material is much more consistent and durable. Si(510) offers very low background as well as the consistency of a manufactured product. The new ZBH-32 sample holders from KSA come in two versions, ZBH-25 and ZBH-32 with the latter being ideally suited for rotating stages and low angle work.

 

 

 

 

20141124_161938Our recent sealed sample cell project required a thin covering film to be applied over loose powder before analysis by XRD. We tested a few options for this film as part of the design process and the results were interesting enough that we thought it would be worth dedicating a full post to that data and expanding the range of materials a bit to satisfy our curiosity.

All data was collected on our primary powder system. This is a Siemens D5000 configured with a theta/theta goniometer, automatic anti-scatter and divergence slits, a standard sealed Cu tube (LFF) and our new KSA-XRD-150 detector system. We alternate between a digital phi stage, 40-position autosampler and the standard, single sample stage which was used in these experiments. I had a spare sealed-sample cell available which made it easy to exchange the films without disturbing the sample surface. The design of these stretches the film taught each time the cell is assembled. I’d originally tried to simply lay the film over a side-load holder, but without being tightly held, it would buckle enough that results at low angles were probably affected. A NiO standard powder was used due to its high purity and compositional difference from any of the film materials.

The data clearly shows that Polyimide was the best choice for this application as it resulted in very limited attenuation as well as an extremely minimal increase in background intensity/amorphous scatter. Some of the other patterns were very interesting though.

20141124_161656 NiO CONTROL No film

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NiO Prolene copy NiO Mylar copy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NiO Polycarbonate copy NiO Polyimide copy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NiO Polypropylene copy

 

 

NiO Prolene

Scotch “Magic” office tape. Adhesive side down.

NiO Scotch packing

Scotch “Heavy duty” packing tape. Adhesive side down.