Misidentification of Major Constituents by Automatic Qualitative Energy Dispersive X-ray Microanalysis: A Problem that Threatens the Credibility of the Analytical Community

Abstract

Automatic qualitative analysis for peak identification is a standard feature of virtually all modern computer-aided analysis software for energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry with electron excitation. Testing of recently installed systems from four different manufacturers has revealed the occasional occurrence of misidentification of peaks of major constituents whose concentrations exceeded 0.1 mass fraction (10 wt%). Test materials where peak identification failures were observed included ZnS, KBr, FeS2, tantalum-niobium alloy, NIST Standard Reference Material 482 (copper–gold alloy), Bi2Te3, uranium–rhodium alloys, platinum–chromium alloy, GaAs, and GaP. These misidentifications of major constituents were exacerbated when the incident beam energy was 10 keV or lower, which restricted or excluded the excitation of the high photon energy K- and L-shell X-rays where multiple peaks, for example, Kα (K-L2,3)–Kβ (K-M2,3); Lα (L3-M4,5)–Lβ (L2-M4)–Lγ (L2-N4), are well resolved and amenable to identification with high confidence. These misidentifications are so severe as to properly qualify as blunders that present a serious challenge to the credibility of this critical analytical technique. Systematic testing of a peak identification system with a suite of diverse materials can reveal the specific elements and X-ray peaks where failures are likely to occur.