4.6 Article

Error Analysis and Correction for Quantitative Phase Analysis Based on Rietveld-Internal Standard Method: Whether the Minor Phases Can Be Ignored?

Journal

CRYSTALS
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cryst8030110

Keywords

Rietveld; quantitative analysis; corrected equation; amorphous

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51602126]
  2. National Key Research and Development Plan of China [2016YFB0303505]
  3. 111 Project of International Corporation on Advanced Cement-based Materials [D17001]
  4. China and University of Jinan Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2017M622118, XBH1716]
  5. Spanish MINECO [BIA2014-57658-C2-2-R]
  6. FEDER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Rietveld-internal standard method for Bragg-Brentano reflection geometry (theta/2 theta) X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns is implemented to determine the amorphous phase content. The effect of some minor phases on quantitative accuracy is assessed. The numerical simulation analysis of errors and the related corrections are discussed. The results reveal that high purity of crystalline phases in the standard must be strictly ensured. The minor amorphous or non-quantified crystalline phases exert significant effect on the quantitative accuracy, even with less than 2 wt% if ignored. The error levels are evaluated by numerical simulation analysis and the corresponding error-accepted zone is suggested. To eliminate such error, a corrected equation is proposed. When the adding standard happens to be present in sample, it should be also carefully dealt with even in low amounts. Based on that ignorance, the absolute and relative error equations (Delta(AE), Delta(RE)) are derived, as proposed. The conditions for high quantitative accuracy of original equation is strictly satisfied with a lower amount of standard phase present in sample, less than 2 wt%, and a higher dosage of internal standard, larger than 20 wt%. The corrected equation to eliminate such quantitative error is suggested.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available