TEXRAY LAB » XRD

Energy dispersive detectors for XRD systems

Posted by: Ken Stauver In: Uncategorized 20 Nov 2014 0 comments Tags: Bruker, D500, D5000, D5005, D8, Diffraction, Diffractometer, Energy-dispersive detector, KS Analytical, powder XRD, PXRD, X-ray, XRD, XRD data collection

Energy-dispersive detectors have been in use on XRD systems for decades, but have always come with caveats. Low energy resolution, Liquid nitrogen cooling, slow start-up and tedious/cryptic tuning controls have limited their popularity in many applications. Silicon Drift technology solves most of these issues and modern electronics covers the rest. The new KSA-SDD system for X-ray diffraction utilizes a full spectrum EDXRF detector which is fully software tuned. The result is a detection system with high enough energy resolution to match the performance of the traditional diffracted-beam monochromator/scintillation counter combination without the inherent 75% intensity drop. The increased countrate allows for much faster data collection speeds with the same counting statistics. We’ve been using this technology at our in-house testing lab (Texray Laboratory Services) for several months to great effect while we refined the system and are now ready to open it up to all XRD users. Contact us to discuss options for integration into your diffractometer.

SDD-XRD-150 installed on a Siemends D5000TT PXRD system. This is one of the powder systems we operate at Texray-Lab.

The detector mounts directly in place of the original scintillation counter.

Speed

Scanning 3-4 times as fast as the traditional scintillation counter/diffracted beam monochromator yields nearly identical results.
Scanning at the same rate results in much smoother scans, greatly improved statistical data and lower limits of detection/quantification.

Complete scan of Novaculite Quartz with a diffracted beam monochromator and scintillation counter vs the new KSA-SDD-150.

5-fingers of Quartz scan of Novaculite Quartz with a diffracted beam monochromator and scintillation counter vs the new KSA-SDD-150.

Energy resolution

140eV under ideal conditions.
All KB peaks eliminated electronically.
W LA1 (8.40 KeV) lines eliminated from Cu KA1,2 (8.04 KeV) scans even with thoroughly contaminated tubes.
Common fluorescence energies (i.e. Fe when Cu tube anodes are used) are greatly reduced. (Bremsstrahlung effects are impossible to remove completely)
Most PSD detectors offer no better than 650eV. This allows for a great deal of fluorescence energy to pass as well as W LA1 from older Cu tubes.

Low angle scatter

The detector mounts in place of the traditional scintillation counter allowing for use of automated variable (motorized) or interchangeable aperture slits to control angular resolution. Scans starting from 0.5 degrees 2? are possible with the proper slit arrangement just as they are with the scintillation counter. The user controls the intensity vs angular resolution of the scan based upon the ideal conditions for their work rather than the limitations of the hardware.
Position sensitive detectors are wide open by design which necessitates knife edges over the sample and additional mechanical aperture plates to block air scatter at low angles. Closing off the detector limits the useable channels and reduces the benefit of these detectors dramatically.

Minimal low angle scatter due to the use of standard aperture slits.

Cu KB1 and W LA1 energies diffract from the 100% peak of Novaculite in between the two primary peaks shown here. Tests with a severely contaminated tube showed no W LA1 passing through the discriminator.

Truly zero maintenance design

No delays – The detector is ready to collect data almost as soon as power is applied.
No external cooling – Air backed Peltier cooling eliminates the need for water circulation and/or liquid nitrogen.
Zero maintenance vacuum design eliminates reliance on an ion pump/backup battery.
12 month warranty against hardware failure under normal use.

Versatility

The Digital Pulse Processor (DPP) includes a usb interface allowing for adjustment and refinement should they be necessary for a particular application. With optional software, full quantitative EDXRF analysis can be performed.
Compatibility with grazing-incidence attachments and parallel beam optics for analysis of thin films.

The detector can be set for any common XRD anode (energy) easily. Multiple energies may even be configured to allow for use with various anodes without the need for additional hardware. We specialize in Siemens (now Bruker) XRD and WD-XRF instrumention and have installation kits ready for the D500, D5000 and D5005. The output is a standard BNC cable with a 5V square pulse output which is standard across every manufacturer we’ve worked with. Kevex and Thermo Si(Li) detectors used this same output.

Please contact KS Analytical Systems for a quote.

Sample holders for XRD analysis

Posted by: Ken Stauver In: Uncategorized 25 Aug 2014 0 comments Tags: D500, D5000, D5005, D8, Sample holder, XRD

The most common practice in powder XRD is to simply fill the recessed well of a sample holder with finely ground powder and start collecting data. That works for a great many users, but everyone is eventually faced with a more complicated situation at some point. At Texray, odd samples and special requirements are the norm. The photos below represent some of the common and not-so-common needs we’ve come across. Many of these are one-off designs fabricated by KS Analytical Systems.

The top row shows the three most common holders we see with various well depths. These are almost exclusively used for loose powders. The goal is to get the surface of the sample into the plane of diffraction with as little of the holder in the beam as possible. The plastic material has a very high scattering coefficient which creates a hump in the data around 13 degrees 2Theta. These are all designed for the 40-position sample changers from Siemens (now Bruker).

The second row gets more interesting with a special holder for high volume instruments. This was designed for magnetic handling and worked great as long as you don’t mind the low angle scatter problem of the plastic and aren’t working with ferrous powders.

The middle is one we use for collecting data from membrane filters. These are notoriously hard to hold down with any precision so they get mounted from the rear and held against a “lip” to keep them both flat, and in the plane of diffraction. They work wonderfully.

Next we have a simple side load sample holder. I’m a big fan of these and use them anytime I’m running loose powders on a single sample stage. It allows the user to load with a very smooth top surface that’s perfectly flat without creating any preferred orientation. Preferred orientation is frequently caused by pressure being applied to the basic top-load holders in an effort to get a flat surface. It is to be avoided whenever possible. Notice that the holders are all Aluminum at this point. Most custom holders are Al or a combination of Al and stainless steel depending upon the special properties desired.

The last row are good examples of odd-shaped sample holders. When you’ve got a rock with one flat surface or a little chip of some material, you still need to keep it in the plane of diffraction. The user simply places a ball of clay in the middle of the holder, the sample goes on top of that and then a glass plate is used to crush the clay (with the sample on top) down such that everything is in plane with the elevates posts. These posts interface with the machine to define the plane of diffraction right across their surface, thus the sample is right where it needs to be without any complicated engineering or microscopic adjustments.

Custom holders for a D500 user. Side load as well as top-load in Al.

Side load precision without the possibility of powder falling out at low angles.

Vacuum holding is common when working with semiconductors or other materials with very consistent thicknesses.

We needed to keep our standards in our desiccator cabinet as well as store membrane filters long-term. Custom laser-cut shelves make this easy.

A typical run of custom sample holders for a high volume XRD operation. This user actually has a custom loading tool that allows for multiple holders to be filled simultaneously.

$This is a completely custom stage designed to hold a large thrust bearing race such that the bottom of the groove is in the plane of diffraction for retained austenite and residual stress measurements. The bearing is held in place by magnets.$

This is a completely custom stage designed to hold a large thrust bearing race such that the bottom of the groove is in the plane of diffraction for retained austenite and residual stress measurements. The bearing is held in place by magnets.

OSHA Propose a Change in Crystalline Silica Rules

Posted by: Vallerie DeLeon In: Uncategorized 16 Apr 2014 0 comments Tags: cristobalite, free crystalline silica, industrial hygiene, NIOSH 7500, OSHA, quartz, respirable silica, X-ray diffraction, XRD

XRD is the preferred analytical method of testing free crystalline silica in workplace atmospheres. At Texray, we offer respirable silica testing using the NIOSH 7500 method, so we thought those of you in industries such as concrete, construction, glass, milling, mining, hydraulic fracking and sandblasting will find it important to know that OSHA has proposed an update to the current rules. The most notable change is a decrease in OSHA’s Permissible Exposure Limits (PEL) from 100 mg/m³ of air for general industries and 250 mg/m³ of air for construction industries to 50 mg/m³ of air for all industries. OSHA, along with other independent occupational health institutions, feel the current PELs are outdated and inadequate, and rightfully so, considering limits were last set in 1971 and based on 1960s research. However, most of these industries may not feel an impact from such as change, as many employers already use preventative measures to reduce dust exposure.

Would this rule change affect the analytical testing procedure?

Photo Courtesy of New Jersey Department of Health

No, XRD limits of detection (LOD) for NIOSH 7500 are 0.005 mg/m³ for an 800 L air sample. This rule change would not affect the testing method, since the LODs for silica in the form of quartz and cristobalite are well below the newly proposed PEL. However, the rule change may increase the number of industrial sites needing to test their work environments for respirable silica.

According to OSHA, “The proposed rule is expected to prevent thousands of deaths from silicosis, lung cancer, other respiratory diseases, and kidney disease. OSHA estimates that the proposed rule will save nearly 700 lives and prevent 1,600 new cases of silicosis per year once the full effects of the rule are realized.” The rule change was proposed last September and the hearing was recently concluded at the beginning of April. Final decision will be coming soon. We will keep you posted.

Free XRD/XRF Literature

Posted by: Vallerie DeLeon In: Uncategorized 27 Mar 2014 0 comments Tags: Advanced X-ray Analysis, crystallography, ICDD, International Centre of Diffraction Data, X-ray diffraction, X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy, XRD, XRF

In my last post, I hinted towards the importance of literature searches before attempting to analyze a new material, and then someone in one of my discussion groups posted a link to the 30 Most Downloaded Advanced X-ray Analysis Articles from the ICDD. I thought some of you might find this helpful, so I am reposting the link.

30 Most Downloaded AXA Publications

The articles are free to download and written by well-known, respected professionals that have been in the business of X-ray analysis for many years. The topics range from sample preparation to applications to instrumentation hardware. Enjoy!

Flexibility, versatility and adaptability

Posted by: Ken Stauver In: Uncategorized 14 Oct 2013 0 comments Tags: crystallography, D500, D5000, D5005, Datascan, Diffraction, Diffractometer, Energy-dispersive detector, Jade, Jade 9.5, KS Analytical, Materials Data Inc, MDI, PXRD, Siemens, Thin-film, X-ray, XRD, XRD data collection, XRR

A large part of our business at KS Analytical Systems is refurbishing and reselling WDXRF and XRD instrumentation. We specialize in Siemens and Bruker models because, and I can’t stress this enough, they last. Siemens was 20 years ahead of their time with features like full computer automation, interlocked radiation housings (not just an enclosed beam path) and independent axis control coming standard on most systems. The D500 may well be the most reliable powder diffractometer ever built and for most of our history, it’s outsold all other models of XRD and XRF combined. Most users are simply performing basic powder scans with many running the optional 40-position sample changer, but I always get excited when I find someone pushing the limits of the platform.

Several years ago I was approached by a new professor at a major American university about purchasing a refurbished Siemens D500 XRD. He’d been seriously considering a new instrument from one of the big-three OEMs, but chose to focus on the D500 due to its reputation for low cost of ownership, versatility and nearly identical resolution/intensity to the new system he’d been looking at. It’s been a few years since that unit was delivered and I’ve been very impressed with the improvements that have been made.

The first step was to bring the software up to date with a complete package from Materials Data Inc. (MDI). This included Datascan 5.0 for instrument control and data acquisition as well as the flagship Jade 9.5 analysis package. Whole pattern fitting (Rietveld), semi-automatic phase ID (Search/Match) and a host of other advanced quantitative and modeling options are included. Jade 9.5 is modular and can be purchased with any combination of these options. I’d estimate that 70% of the XRD systems we sell go out with some level of MDI package. We’ve been working with them for 20 years now and have never heard anything other than glowing praise for their excellent products and support. One key feature of Jade is that it was designed to be a universal analysis solution from the ground up so there’s never a problem opening any of the OEM file formats. It’s much easier to justify the cost to upgrade your software when you know it will integrate seamlessly with any other data or instruments you may encounter. Contact KSA if you’d like more information on this.

This is Jade 9.5. You’ll notice that it’s a much different interface than the Jade 2010 program I usually use. This option is modular with available plug-ins for all the higher level functions of Jade 2010, but 9.5 is perpetually licensed.

This is actually the VirtualXRD program that comes along with Datascan. I don’t use it often, but some of my users run extremely long count times and predicting the affect of a parameter change could save them days of experimentation. It’s a great tool even for users running simple 1 hour scans.

The next step was more hardware based than anything else. The independent axis control of the D500 (in Theta/Theta or Theta/2Theta configurations) allows for both rocking curves and grazing incidence scans. With the goal of analyzing thin-films in mind, we upgraded the D500 with a grazing incidence attachment. These are designed to minimize scatter while the sample is held at a shallow (usually 3 degrees) incident angle and the scan is performed with the detector alone. The attachment consists of a long collimator coupled with a simple monochromator just before the detector. We’ve performed some rather intense studies with one of these at Texray and were very impressed with its performance. In fact, we use it whenever practical even though we have a dedicated parallel beam optics system in the lab as well. It was about time for a new tube so a new, ceramic Cu long, fine focus tube was included in the upgrade.

Some additional software solutions were developed on-site to facilitate XRR (X-ray Reflectivity) measurements around the same time. I confess that this is not something I’m personally very familiar with, but it seems fascinating. It involves scans at extremely low angles which can require caution since one is working with a very nearly direct beam.

The last upgrade he made is actually the one that most impressed me and the one I had absolutely nothing to do with. In an effort to further expand the capabilities of his instrument, he purchased and installed an energy dispersive detector with an integral digital pulse processor (DPP). Clever mounting and some experimentation allowed him to perform EDXRF elemental (qualitative AND quantitative) analysis on samples while using the D500s X-ray tube as the primary emission source. The flexibility of the D500 platform even allowed him to control the effective layer depth by adjusting the incident beam angle. Since his application involved analysis of a thin film coating, he set the goniometer to a low angle to minimize penetration depth and substrate interference. After seeing how well this worked, I immediately started working on a similar upgrade that we could offer to all our current and future XRD users. I’ll detail my early progress in the next post.

Minimum start angle tests

Posted by: Ken Stauver In: Uncategorized 01 Oct 2013 0 comments Tags: crystallography, D500, D5000, D5005, D8, Diffraction, Diffractometer, KS Analytical, PXRD, Siemens, X-ray, XRD, XRD data collection

All of the powder XRD (PXRD) systems we work with use either manually interchangeable aperture slits or automatic (stepper motor driven) slits to control divergence and scatter. One of the most common questions I hear from new users is “What is the ideal slit arrangement”. While I realize that there are many instruments out there with “one-size fits all” slits, the D500, D5000, D5005 and D8 optics are what I call “Research Grade”. This means that they can be adjusted and tuned for a particular application to maximize effects that are desirable and minimize those which are not. One of the most common reasons to change the anti-scatter and divergence slits is to reduce scatter over the sample at low angles. This scatter is the primary limiting factor for users who want to see diffracted peaks at very low angles. At Texray, we offer instrument time (data collection) as one of our services and have received requests for starting angles as low as 1 degree 2theta so it occurred to me that now would be a good time to collect some reference data and answer this question once and for all.

The image on the left shows the effect that the anti-scatter and divergence slits have on low angle scatter. The image on the right is of the two primary reflections of quartz (Novaculite) with the same slits. Note the intensity loss. The benefit of automatic slits is that they can be set very small at the beginning of the scan and gradually open up throughout the angular range. Very few users need that kind of flexibility, but since we’re talking about slits, it bears mentioning.

This data was collected with matched slits set at 0.2mm, 0.6mm, 1mm and 2mm. These correspond to practical starting angles of 0.6, 0.9, 1.4 and 2.5 degrees 2theta respectively.

Looking at the actual peaks, you can see the affect the smaller slits have on the rest of the data. These were collected without the benefit of a diffracted beam monochromator and with the primary soller slit removed. Neither of these factors would have a dramatic impact on the result, but the lack of a primary beam soller slit explains the asymmetrical peak shape in the second scan range pictured.

Phase ID

Posted by: Ken Stauver In: Uncategorized 23 Sep 2013 0 comments Tags: AMCSD, Bruker, crystallography, D500, D5000, D5005, D8, Datascan, Diffraction, Diffractometer, ICDD, Jade, Jade 2010, Jade 9.5, JS Technical, KS Analytical, Materials Data Inc, MDI, NIST, Phase analysis, Phase ID, PXRD, Siemens, X-ray, XRD, XRF

XRD work is categorized into two major groups. Single crystal and powder analysis. While single crystal work is usually highly customized to particular applications and involves a largely unique hardware set, powder (PXRD) work covers a broad range of applications. Many of which can be performed without any special hardware at all. Perhaps it would be more accurate to call it “Randomly oriented small particle” diffraction. Somehow I think “ROSPXRD” would be slow to catch on. At the risk of oversimplifying the options, I’d like to take a few posts to showcase some of the more common analyses which can be performed with a basic PXRD system and perhaps a few that require minimal additional attachments.

This is an example of a Bruker D8 Advance configured in its most basic PXRD state with only a scintillation counter, sample stage and source.

This is the same D8 base instrument configured for single crystal XRD. Note the Chi, phi, XYZ stage, area detector (2D) and Goebel focusing mirrors.

My last post involved a basic phase identification and this seemed like a great place to start. Most PXRD users are asked to identify some unknown bit of corrosion, rock or contaminant at some point. I once took a shot at something which later turned out to be sewage sludge ash. I have no idea what they hoped to find in that. Exotic, mundane or distasteful, the most basic XRD can collect the necessary data to perform this analysis. Phase ID is usually the first step most users take toward more advanced software. In addition to the simple pattern analysis features that usually come standard, you’ll need an engine designed to search one of the many commercial or open-source databases available. The ICDD, NIST and AMCSD are probably the most popular with several others on the fringe. There are even user-developed databases which are usually compiled in a particular lab to cover the range of phases they expect to see based on their product or application.

Limiting the search to categories of phases which are likely to be present greatly improves the relevance of the results list. There’s obviously no reason to search through a huge list of minerals when trying to identify a metallic oxide coating. Hit lists can also be refined based on data from other sources such as qualitative elemental analysis. We use our WDXRF systems and the built in elemental filter in Jade to trim the options substantially.

Any good search/Match engine will have support not only for multiple databases, but also offer the option to limit your search to certain subfiles which are group my material categories.

Semi-quantitative or simple qualitative elemental data can be used to eliminate a large percentage of erroneous hits so the analyst can focus on only pertinent options. We prefer to bundle an XRF scan with any Phase ID project.

Isolating the valid hits from erroneous is where experience comes into play. Non-ideal particle size, preferred orientation and crystallographic imperfections can make the process quite difficult. Relative peak intensity ratios, peak width and sometimes even the complete absence of a particular peak which would theoretically be present all present opportunities to gain additional insight. Sometimes this is relatively easy as in the case I presented in the previous post, but other situations are not so simple. These difficulties are amplified in the case of low concentrations and complex mixtures.

This is a great example of Phase ID the way we all wish it came out. The peaks are sharp, intense and located right on their theoretical angle.

This is an example of something a little harder to nail down. Overlapping peaks, several additional phases and a highly imperfect sample. Refining the options based on external measurements and in depth sample prep make the difference between success and failure in cases like this.

XRD pattern analysis has come along way in the last 40 years and most of the major improvements have come on the heels of increased computing capability which enables us to perform exhaustive iterative calculations on complex patterns quickly and at comparatively low cost. However, there is nothing on the market as of now which has made an experienced analyst obsolete.

Geological phase ID

Posted by: Ken Stauver In: Uncategorized 15 Sep 2013 3 comments Tags: AMCSD, Bruker, crystallography, D500, D5000, D5005, D8, Diffraction, Diffractometer, Eberl, geology, ICDD, Jade, Jade 2010, Jade 9.5, JS Technical, KS Analytical, Materials Data Inc, MDI, NIST, Phase ID, PXRD, RIR, RockJock, Siemens, X-ray, XRD, XRF

I stumbled into Dondero’s Rock Shop a few weeks ago and struck up a conversation with the owner. He had been interested in geology all his life and was now operating a very nice shop in North Conway, NH with just about every type of mineral one could imagine on display. It was a great opportunity to have an expert identify a few specimens my boys had collected the previous day and he was more than happy to help. These were very large single crystals of relatively common minerals, but it was obvious that experience makes all the difference when one is trying to identify them by sight. I offered to return the favor by collecting XRD data on anything that ever managed to stump his well trained eye and he immediately brought out an interesting sedimentary formation which he’d sliced into cross to sections. He had been very curious about its composition and I brought home a sample. My technical expertise is primarily in the hardware we use at Texray while the real science is handled by other, more highly skilled hands, but this seemed like a fun little project and good practice if nothing else.

Geological samples are particularly difficult to analyze by XRD as they contain various defects which are difficult if not impossible to model based on theoretical data. Our precious Rietveld refinements roll off of this type of data like water off a ducks back all too often and we’re left wondering how on earth this mud could be mistaken for moon rocks. As wonderful as Rietveld is in well-trained hands, we tend to rely much more on comparative data when we’re working with this type of sample. We can thank Dennis Eberl of USGS in Boulder, CO for bringing RockJock into the world to solve exactly these types of problems. RockJock is relies on what’s called RIR. That is Relative Intensity Ratio analysis to provide both qualitative and quantitative results. The algorithm has been massaged into a number of commercial products in an effort to improve the user interface and add additional functionality, but the core of all that is still readily available on the internet for anyone interested to download. If you’re interested in something a little more user friendly, we offer ClaySim from MDI.

To the left you can see the data I collected after mild grinding. It’s not uncommon to spend several hours collecting data before it’s adequate for quantification or other advance analysis, but as we’re only interested in qualitative phase ID, this will more than suffice. I was quite surprised to find only two major phases present since the sample clearly shows four distinct layers with completely different coloration. The scan actually ran all the way to 120°2Θ, but the “action” is mostly concentrated at the lower angles. Hardcore geologist actually push the lower limit all the way down to 2.5°2Θ in an effort to catch a few illusive peaks. The analysis program you see here is MDI Jade 2010. It’s their flagship product and for good reason. Almost all of our users are running some form of Jade for their analysis and all have had nothing but glowing praise for it.

So it appears that the mystery rock was actually little more than Quartz and Dickite. It’s possible that there’s a bit of Kaolinite mixed in there as well, particularly because Dickite and Kaolinite share a chemical composition. The real fun started when I let Jade loose using a feature called “One Click Analysis”. This is as close to a “black box” as XRD analysis will ever get. With good data collected on a solid, well-aligned XRD, this little button can provide impressive results with no user input at all. It’s not the magic bullet for every situation, but in this case, it recommended yet another phase with the same chemical composition as Kaolinite and Dickite. Nacrite. Adding this into our phase list improved the difference pattern and allowed Jade to model nearly every bump in the pattern.

Welcome to Texray

Posted by: Ken Stauver In: Uncategorized 09 Sep 2013 0 comments Tags: crystallography, Diffraction, Diffractometer, geology, KS Analytical, Phase analysis, Phase ID, PXRD, X-ray, XRD, XRF

As the owner of KS Analytical Systems, I’ve seen XRD and XRF instrumentation used throughout industry and academia. Over the years we’ve expanded from a simple, on-site service company to a much more comprehensive organization offering complete systems, software and hardware upgrades and even sample preparation equipment. As our demo laboratory has grown to include more and more systems of increasing complexity, we started looking for an opportunity to put our in-house systems to good use. Texray Laboratory Services was founded to serve existing KSA customers who needed specialty work, method generation and training services as well as the greater industrial and scientific community with routine qualitative and quantitative analysis. We’ll be using this blog to showcase special applications and interesting projects so come back often.