4.5 Article

Choosing optimal exposure times for XRF core-scanning: Suggestions based on the analysis of geological reference materials

Journal

GEOCHEMISTRY GEOPHYSICS GEOSYSTEMS
Volume 17, Issue 4, Pages 1558-1566

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2016GC006256

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology [104-3113-M-005-001, 104-2116-M-002-005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

X-ray fluorescence (XRF) core-scanning is a fast and nondestructive technique to assess elemental variations of unprocessed sediments. However, although the exposure time of XRF-scanning directly affects the scanning counts and total measurement time, only a few studies have considered the influence of exposure time during the scan. How to select an optimal exposure time to achieve reliable results and reduce the total measurement time is an important issue. To address this question, six geological reference materials from the Geological Survey of Japan (JLK-1, JMS-1, JMS-2, JSD-1, JSD-2, and JSD-3) were scanned by the ltrax-XRF core scanner using the Mo- and the Cr-tube with different exposure times to allow a comparison of scanning counts with absolute concentrations. The regression lines and correlation coefficients of elements that are generally used in paleoenvironmental studies were examined for the different exposure times and X-ray tubes. The results show that for those elements with relatively high concentrations or high detectability, the correlation coefficients are higher than 0.90 for all exposure times. In contrast, for the low detectability or low concentration elements, the correlation coefficients are relatively low, and improve little with increased exposure time. Therefore, we suggest that the influence of different exposure times is insignificant for the accuracy of the measurements. Thus, caution must be taken when interpreting the results of elements with low detectability, even when the exposure times are long and scanning counts are reasonably high.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available