Wish List for PFE Features

[Probeman]

Ok, I see the source of your confusion.  First of all it appears you are using an edited file of x-ray line energies, which confused me a bit... 

But more importantly, when it says "For Cs Lb     LiF at  2.66747 angstroms (66248) ..."

The phrase "Cs Lb" doesn't mean the on-peak position of the Cs Lb, it means the off-peak position of Cs Lb.  In the screen shot below, because I clicked the "Low Off-Peak Interferences" button, it lists the interferences in the vicinity of the Cs Lb low off-peak position.  Which is exactly what one would like to see, correct?  If I had clicked the "Hi Off-Peak Interferences" button it would display the interferences around the Cs Lb high off peak position.



Does that make more sense?

I can fix the output so it states that more clearly.   Remember, in the Standard Assignments dialog is where you can see the on-peak interferences...

Hi John,

yes, this does make more sense. I think a slight rewording of the text might be helpful, because I got confused by the peak position, which was in fact one of the background positions... Maybe this can be made more clear.

Cheers
Philipp

Yes, the text is now improved as seen here:

For Pr la (hi-off),    LIF at  2.48099 angstroms( 61865.7), at an assumed concentration of 1 wt.%
  Interference by La LB4            at  2.44970 ( 61088.7) =      2.5%
  Interference by Pb LG6      III   at  2.45060 ( 61111.1) =       .3%
  Interference by Pb SLG2`    III   at  2.45750 ( 61282.4) =      1.8%
  Interference by La LB1            at  2.45950 ( 61332.1) =    269.5%

[Philipp Poeml]

Hi John,

in PfE, when I output data in user specified format, and I select the sample name column, the sample name is correctly outputted. However, in the average and Stddev rows the sample name is "0". Could we have the sample name also here? It would help sorting samples in excel.

Cheers
Philipp

[John Donovan]

Hi John,

in PfE, when I output data in user specified format, and I select the sample name column, the sample name is correctly outputted. However, in the average and Stddev rows the sample name is "0". Could we have the sample name also here? It would help sorting samples in excel.

Cheers
Philipp

Hi Philipp,
How's this for "turn around":  your wish is granted- download now!

Also see this please:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=47.msg3500#msg3500

john

[Philipp Poeml]

Sounds great! Thanks a lot!

[pgopon]

Is three a way to automate a varying number of standard analyses?  If not this might be a nice feature to have.

 For example I was trying to automate standards overnight, and some of our standards are know to be less homogenous than others, which isn't a problem as long as we average a large number of standard analyses (~30-50).  However I don't want to run that many standard analyses points on the rest of my standards that are homogenous as that would be a waste of time.  My solution was to run the homogenous standards first (with 10 points per standard), and then log in remotely in the evening to run the heterogenous standards (with 30 points per standard). 

Couldn't there be an option to run the number of points that are automated (like we do in the unknown automation)?

phil

[Probeman]

Is three a way to automate a varying number of standard analyses?  If not this might be a nice feature to have.

 For example I was trying to automate standards overnight, and some of our standards are know to be less homogenous than others, which isn't a problem as long as we average a large number of standard analyses (~30-50).  However I don't want to run that many standard analyses points on the rest of my standards that are homogenous as that would be a waste of time.  My solution was to run the homogenous standards first (with 10 points per standard), and then log in remotely in the evening to run the heterogenous standards (with 30 points per standard). 

Couldn't there be an option to run the number of points that are automated (like we do in the unknown automation)?

phil

The only thing I can think of is to create a number of identical MDB files (with slightly different names obviously, for example, 4stdpoints.mdb, 8stdpoints.mdb, etc), where the *only* difference is the number of standard points to acquire in the Automate! window, and then simply use the File Setup as the automation basis for your standards in another MDB file.
john

[Ben Buse]

Hi John,

I think in PFE you can control the OM light on/off. What we often do on the JEol is use the autofocus which is really good but requires the light on - then if we take automatic pictures the BSE contrast/brightness never works as the reflectivity of the sample keeps changing. What would be really neat would be if during an automated run of points with light on using autofocus, we could check box somewhere that for each automatic image it would turn the light off - acquire the bse image - then turn the light on. What do think? Would it add a large overhead?

Ben

[John Donovan]

Hi John,

I think in PFE you can control the OM light on/off. What we often do on the JEol is use the autofocus which is really good but requires the light on - then if we take automatic pictures the BSE contrast/brightness never works as the reflectivity of the sample keeps changing. What would be really neat would be if during an automated run of points with light on using autofocus, we could check box somewhere that for each automatic image it would turn the light off - acquire the bse image - then turn the light on. What do think? Would it add a large overhead?

Ben

So the software doesn't already automatically turn off the light after the auto-focus is run?

It's not a bad idea at all I think.  It could be implemented...
john

[John Donovan]

Hi John,

Hopefully a pretty quick one for you. When I close DigitizeImage without having saved the acquired image, I receive a very helpful prompt asking whether I want to save the image before exiting. Currently the prompt offers options "Yes" (save the image to the database, then exit DigitizeImage) and "No" (don't save the image, then exit DigitizeImage).

Would it be possible to add a third "Cancel" option to the exit dialog (in addtion to "Yes" and "No"), meaning "return to DigitizeImage without doing anything, do not exit or save/not save the image, Owen clicked the wrong button like an idiot and didn't really want to exit DigitizeImage in the first place." Sometimes, if you hit the Enter key at the wrong time, DigitizeImage closes when you don't mean it to.

Thanks!

Everything is possible, but not always easy!

Why not just re-open the Digitize Image window again if you closed it accidentally?

How's the Boeing installation going?

[Probeman]

Why not just re-open the Digitize Image window again if you closed it accidentally?

If I re-open, the image needs to be re-acquired, and the previously-picked points are not shown on the new image.

Well then, don't close the damn window unless you really want to!   

Seriously, I'm sure I could add a Cancel button...  this weekend.

[John Donovan]

Why not just re-open the Digitize Image window again if you closed it accidentally?

If I re-open, the image needs to be re-acquired, and the previously-picked points are not shown on the new image.

Well then, don't close the damn window unless you really want to!   

Seriously, I'm sure I could add a Cancel button...  this weekend.

No rush - low priority item. Thanks!

Your wish is granted!

Cancel button added!

[sckuehn]

A possibly crazy EDS idea and perhaps a less crazy one...

I'm not sure how well the Thermo software fits EDS backgrounds, but on Bruker some materials don't result in great fits and therefore the background subtraction for net intensities can be off a bit. As an example, I have seen >0.5 wt% Al2O3 reported in a material with no Al because the background model was too low. Other than better EDS background fits, I wonder if MAN for EDS might work. To do this, one would need total counts within a ROI, not just the net counts. Yes, this appears crazy since EDS records the (sometimes cluttered) adjacent backgrounds, but as with the example above, there can be problems with these.

The perhaps more sane idea relates to the overhead of processing runs with lots of EDS data, an overhead that would be multiplied many times over if TDI using EDS intensities is implemented. Perhaps once they are first extracted, the EDS intensities could be cached in the MDB. Then, reprocessing would go much faster. Of course, there would have to be a way to repopulate the cache as needed, either on demand, or if one changes the EDS elements.

[John Donovan]

A possibly crazy EDS idea and perhaps a less crazy one...

I'm not sure how well the Thermo software fits EDS backgrounds, but on Bruker some materials don't result in great fits and therefore the background subtraction for net intensities can be off a bit. As an example, I have seen >0.5 wt% Al2O3 reported in a material with no Al because the background model was too low. Other than better EDS background fits, I wonder if MAN for EDS might work. To do this, one would need total counts within a ROI, not just the net counts. Yes, this appears crazy since EDS records the (sometimes cluttered) adjacent backgrounds, but as with the example above, there can be problems with these.

The perhaps more sane idea relates to the overhead of processing runs with lots of EDS data, an overhead that would be multiplied many times over if TDI using EDS intensities is implemented. Perhaps once they are first extracted, the EDS intensities could be cached in the MDB. Then, reprocessing would go much faster. Of course, there would have to be a way to repopulate the cache as needed, either on demand, or if one changes the EDS elements.

Hi Steve,
I seem to have overlooked this post of yours.

In the latest versions of Probe for EPMA one can now specify the quant method (including background fit models) for both Bruker and Thermo integrated EDS-WDS quantification.

For Thermo, the specify quant method is currently global (though Thermo has said they could add an API call that would allow it to be specified on a per sample basis), while with Bruker one can specify the quant method on a per sample basis and PFE automatically saves that info for subsequent processing.

I realize you are still using an ancient version of PFE for data acquisition, but have you tried opening one of your old PFE database files with a new version of PFE for data reprocessing?

As for MAN on EDS ROIs, I'd have to think about that... one issue is that the vendors would have to provide a new get intensity call because they control the ROI widths.

As for EDS TDI, that would be a major task to implement, but maybe someday when I get my head above water...   

[sckuehn]

John,

I haven't installed the new version yet, but I probably should. I have an offline computer with the Bruker software already on it. So, I would need to download, install (assume I will need a password for a fresh install), and configure.

A couple of years ago, I spent a little time trying to get the Bruker interface working on an offline computer, but I didn't get it working. It wasn't terribly important, and I never got back to it. If I recall correctly, demo mode wouldn't talk to Bruker, and telling it to interface to the probe didn't work since there was no probe.

What is the right way to set up an offline computer (no hardware access) so that it still has an active connection to the EDS software for data reprocessing?

- Steve

[John Donovan]

I haven't installed the new version yet, but I probably should. I have an offline computer with the Bruker software already on it. So, I would need to download, install (assume I will need a password for a fresh install), and configure.

A couple of years ago, I spent a little time trying to get the Bruker interface working on an offline computer, but I didn't get it working. It wasn't terribly important, and I never got back to it. If I recall correctly, demo mode wouldn't talk to Bruker, and telling it to interface to the probe didn't work since there was no probe.

What is the right way to set up an offline computer (no hardware access) so that it still has an active connection to the EDS software for data reprocessing?

Hi Steve,
Email me for the PFE download password and I'll also send you a document for installing the Bruker software for off-line EDS-WDS data processing.

Note that you need the API and LAN licenses from Bruker for off-line processing.   That's another nice thing about Thermo- no separate license is required for data reprocessing!  Just like Probe for EPMA!
john