Latest version changes for Probe for EPMA (and CalcImage) v. 13.8.3

[John Donovan]

A small change that I think some will appreciate is that I changed the behavior of the "pre-peaking" flags as seen here:



so that instead of doing the peaking prior for all elements before the actual sample acquisition (this is for for unknowns only),  the program now does the spectrometer peaking for each element "in-line", that is one at a time just before each element is acquired.

The main difference is that only a (fine) ROM spectrometer scan is run instead of all the peaking options. I think this is an improvement.

Of course the pre-peaking is executed only before the first point for each sample is acquired.

[John Donovan]

The latest version of PFE (10.8.5) now has implemented new code for fluorescence by beta lines. This is a significant improvement to the Reed fluorescence method.

To utilize the new fluorescence by beta lines code just check this box as seen here:



To utilize the new fluorescence by beta lines code as your default, edit this parameters in your Probewin.ini file [software] section:

UseFluorescenceByBetaLinesFlag=-1

[Ben Buse]

Hi John,

I just downloaded 10.8.7 yesterday and now I can't change my standards from the default standard with highest intensity. When I change it in standard assignments click ok fine - then I open standard assignments again and it hasn't changed

Thanks

Ben

[John Donovan]

Hi John,

I just downloaded 10.8.7 yesterday and now I can't change my standards from the default standard with highest intensity. When I change it in standard assignments click ok fine - then I open standard assignments again and it hasn't changed

Thanks

Ben

Hi Ben,
Yes, I confirm.  Apparently I broke this last weekend as I was prepping for integrating the EDS elements into the Elements/Cations window- a mere slip of the finger!      Turns out the standard assignments dialog uses some of the same code as Elements/Cations...

Anyway, I fixed it and it is ready to download now.  Sorry for the trouble!   
john

[John Donovan]

I recently implemented a new non-linear regression for alpha factor matrix corrections as seen here:



Please note: PFE runs that were previously assigned the calibration curve correction method will now automatically be changed to these new non-linear alpha factors. This is a less than ideal consequence of adding another alpha factor method (in addition to the previous one, two and three regression coefficients) since this new non-linear method utilizes four (yes four!) regression coefficients!
   
So any existing runs using the calibration curve correction method will have to be switched   manually to the calibration curve method using the Analytical | ZAF, Phi-Rho-Z, Alpha Factor and Calibration Curve menu. I am truly sorry about that but there was no other way to do it in the code...

Details regrading this new regression and a short history of these attempts by Ogilvie, Bence, Albee, Rivers, Armstrong are described here:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=239.msg2763#msg2763

[Anette von der Handt]

Hi John,

did you remove the specified APF factors from the Element/Cations window or move them to another place? I cannot find them anymore and I found them very useful (although the integrated intensity option surely is more rigorous but can't I  have both options).

Thanks!

Anette

Edited to add: Ups, found it. You moved it to the top right of the window. All is good. Thanks!

[Probeman]

Hi John,

did you remove the specified APF factors from the Element/Cations window or move them to another place? I cannot find them anymore and I found them very useful (although the integrated intensity option surely is more rigorous but can't I  have both options).

Thanks!

Anette

Edited to add: Ups, found it. You moved it to the top right of the window. All is good. Thanks!

Hi Anette,
Sorry about that but I had to rearrange things a bit for the new WDS/EDX options.  I think the new arrangement is better once we all get used to it!
jojn

[Anette von der Handt]

Hi John,

that is fine, I was just blind for a moment. For a second, I worried that you removed a functionality but this is not the PFE way, so not sure why I thought that.
Thanks,
Anette

[Probeman]

Apparently some people are having trouble updating Probe for EPMA.  Here are some explicit instructions:

Open Probe for EPMA by double-clicking the Probe for EPMA icon on your desktop or from the Windows Start button. Once the software launches you will be asked if you want to connect to the instrument. You can click No for connecting to the instrument.  Now go to the Help menu and click the Update Probe for EPMA menu as seen here:



Note that there is no need to remove your previous version of Probe for EPMA before updating PFE. In fact, we suggest that you *do not* remove PFE prior to updating.

Then click the Download Update button as seen here:



Now wait for several minutes while the latest PFE update downloads. Once the download is complete you will see this:



If you had a data file open, PFE will prompt you to close it first, but if you didn't open a data file in PFE, the installer will prompt you with this window:



Just follow the remaining directions in the installer and you will be updated to the latest version of Probe for EPMA!   

Please note: unless you are running Windows XP or older, you will have to click Yes on the User Access Control (UAC) dialog to complete the install.  It's the law- according to Microsoft.

If you click away from the installer you might have to select the UAC from the task bar as seen here:

[UofO EPMA Lab]

I found that the easiest installation for version (this goes to!) 11 of Probe for EPMA, is before running the CalcZAF.msi and ProbeForEPMA.msi installers, first delete all desktop and menu shortcuts for all Probe Software apps.

Once you run the new CalcZAF.msi and ProbeForEPMA.msi installers, new menu shortcuts will be created automatically.  You'll have to re-create your desktop shortcuts manually if desired.

For some reason, the installers don't remove or replace the old shortcuts...   

[Ben Buse]

Hi John,

Struggling today. I downloaded the latest PFE 10.9.9 yesterday. But I am now having problems in CalcImage with the quant oxide maps. The totals are less than the individual element oxide totals. So for Calcium hydroxide, I get 70% CaO but a total of 50%. I've recalculated the project on my laptop with PFE 10.9.7. and I get sensible totals. Do you know if you've changed anything that might upset this - or am I doing something stupid.

Thanks

Ben

[John Donovan]

Hi John,

Struggling today. I downloaded the latest PFE 10.9.9 yesterday. But I am now having problems in CalcImage with the quant oxide maps. The totals are less than the individual element oxide totals. So for Calcium hydroxide, I get 70% CaO but a total of 50%. I've recalculated the project on my laptop with PFE 10.9.7. and I get sensible totals. Do you know if you've changed anything that might upset this - or am I doing something stupid.

Thanks

Ben

Hi Ben,
Not that I know of.   Ok, I just tried an oxide run and it works fine (open the log window to see the calculations results as the quantification proceeds):

                        Na      Si       K      Al      Mg      Fe      Ca      Mn      Ti       P       O       H   Total
Weight %:  979 (211,4)  3.29845 31.3922 .720780 11.7624 .032647 .401468 2.69897 .203678 .139854 -.00883 48.8799 .000000 99.5215
Weight %:  980 (212,4)  2.76934 32.3835 .852581 9.66902 .073934 .555545 1.88152 .204453 -.06545 -.00887 47.5982 .000000 95.9138
Weight %:  981 (213,4)  2.02033 37.0464 .704980 6.86879 .144128 .400955 1.20648 .220130 .003332 -.00871 49.9126 .000000 98.5194
Weight %:  982 (214,4)  1.44122 39.3231 .701933 5.09602 .110409 .709962 1.23678 .141067 .071163 -.02037 50.8132 .000000 99.6244
Weight %:  983 (215,4)  1.66466 38.9776 .819676 5.75766 .111931 .308118 1.15845 .162928 -.06485 -.03147 50.8657 .000000 99.7305
Weight %:  984 (216,4)  1.51017 43.6617 1.02181 5.40948 .053808 .400695 .866961 .131934 .071618 -.02015 55.8491 .000000 108.957
Weight %:  985 (217,4)  1.39239 40.9404 .885933 5.58676 .040087 .153872 .867789 .152300 .071972 .008528 52.8013 .000000 102.901
Weight %:  986 (218,4)  2.05945 37.1954 .928486 7.19801 .023321 .431721 1.35110 .137120 .003206 .002638 50.4119 .000000 99.7424
Weight %:  987 (219,4)  1.42849 39.6702 .530955 5.52616 .093580 .401601 .851703 .142047 .071872 -.02572 51.2926 .000000 99.9834
Weight %:  988 (220,4)  .876764 41.6110 .322043 3.57161 .197415 .803055 .510864 .243759 .003258 -.03162 51.5540 .000000 99.6622
Weight %:  989 (221,4)  .636250 42.8591 .266356 2.66512 .185101 .834001 .429628 .212668 .003286 .008223 52.0854 .000000 100.185
Weight %:  990 (222,4)  .437104 41.4851 .127329 1.86113 .117814 .525722 .430092 .069530 .071945 -.00289 49.5644 .000000 94.6873
Weight %:  991 (223,4)  .508465 40.9945 .089027 1.93815 .282766 .185396 .640997 .192784 .140511 -.03697 49.2239 .000000 94.1595
Weight %:  992 (224,4)  .574218 40.1800 .130278 2.43155 1.05348 1.11075 .669699 .276700 .138733 .002094 49.6237 .000000 96.1912
Weight %:  993 (225,4)  .844328 34.8066 .300331 3.76554 2.06298 2.77459 1.71382 .527145 .135120 .022984 46.4724 .000000 93.4258
Weight %:  994 (226,4)  1.87487 30.7206 .767081 6.73338 2.02259 4.28853 2.72552 .490986 .199771 .015888 45.7455 .000000 95.5847
Weight %:  995 (227,4)  2.79331 29.4660 1.06674 9.15421 2.13123 3.60713 2.73010 .253703 .335996 -.01746 46.7072 .000000 98.2281
Weight %:  996 (228,4)  2.80719 29.6150 1.21443 9.58739 1.42697 4.23025 2.74340 .212910 .469921 -.00095 47.1164 .000000 99.4229
Weight %:  997 (229,4)  3.05087 29.0188 1.19110 10.4206 .904456 2.59477 1.98229 .293929 .812400 .005765 46.4031 .000000 96.6781
Weight %:  998 (230,4)  2.50091 27.7767 1.31771 10.0498 1.07634 5.34668 1.48855 .209897 4.01300 .012846 47.3198 .000000 101.112
Weight %:  999 (231,4)  2.00536 25.1349 1.24976 8.27710 2.05486 8.35139 1.30266 .310083 5.94330 -.00774 45.2697 .000000 99.8913

I've seen a situation where CalcImage gets confused and produces low totals- that may be what you are seeing.  I don't know what causes it yet, but re-starting CalcImage and re-running the image quant fixes it.
 
You could also try updating to 11.0.2 and see what that gives you.   If you update/try again and are still stuck you'll have to zip the project all up and send it to me. 
john

[John Donovan]

Hi John,

Struggling today. I downloaded the latest PFE 10.9.9 yesterday. But I am now having problems in CalcImage with the quant oxide maps. The totals are less than the individual element oxide totals. So for Calcium hydroxide, I get 70% CaO but a total of 50%. I've recalculated the project on my laptop with PFE 10.9.7. and I get sensible totals. Do you know if you've changed anything that might upset this - or am I doing something stupid.

Thanks

Ben

Hi Ben,
Ok, I found and fixed the problem with stoichiometric oxygen calculation in both the v. 10.9.9 and v. 11.0.3.  It was caused by some code which I had inserted to handle element channels that were disabled for quant in CalcImage (the bug only affected Calcimage).  However, the disable quant flag is respected now in any case.

So feel free to update v. 10.9.9 (no version change), or go ahead and manually download v. 11.0.3 and that should fix it also.  Note that once you have manually downloaded v. (this goes to) 11 of PFE, you can use the Help | Update Probe for EPMA menu from then on.
john

[John Donovan]

The latest version of Probe for EPMA now includes "look and feel" changes to the Output menu, Acquisition Options and Elements/Cations dialogs courtesy of design work by Anette von der Handt.

[John Donovan]

Version 11.0.4 is now available for general download from all FTP sites and the Probe Software Update page here:

https://probesoftware.com/Update.html

Details here:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=40.0

For PFE, you will need to download and install *both* msi files before running the new software!

This new version is in general use at several labs and no one is reporting any issues, but do let us know if you see anything "interesting".  Thanks!
john