Probe Software Users Forum

Software => Probe for EPMA => Topic started by: John Donovan on August 20, 2013, 10:49:14 am

Title: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 20, 2013, 10:49:14 am
One can now output mineral end member calculations from the User Specified Output menu (thanks to Paul Carpenter!)

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i40.tinypic.com/scdqmo.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on September 11, 2013, 06:40:05 pm
Did you know that one can now specify which samples (std, unk or wavescans) the beam deflection acquisition applies to in the Automate! window?

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i42.tinypic.com/28mh3sm.jpg)

Thanks to Philipp Poeml for the idea!
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on October 04, 2013, 11:44:47 am
This new feature in Probe for EPMA allows the user to see the cursor spectrometer position in relative or absolute spectrometer units.  Might be handy when lots of different background positions are being utilized in different sample setups:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i39.tinypic.com/2znvlm8.jpg)

A previous feature requested by Paul Carpenter is the checkbox here to *not* re-scale the KLM markers so that the marker tops and labels do not go off-scale. Useful so one can see the relative KLM marker heights even when zoomed in on the background:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i43.tinypic.com/2aana5w.jpg)

A related feature is this checkbox which allows the user to "suppress" the display of KLM markers for the element currently being plotted. This option can help make the display more readable since we do not normally care too much about secondary lines of the current element since the secondary lines will scale in intensity with the main peak:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i40.tinypic.com/rbk70y.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on October 04, 2013, 07:06:21 pm
Did you know that you can perform kmeans (Hardigan-Wong) modified clustering methods to quantitative analysis data from Probe for EPMA using CalcImage to extract phase information?

See this thread:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=41.msg254#msg254
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 22, 2013, 05:31:39 pm
Anette von der Handt posted this idea to our "wishlist" last Tuesday and I agree, it's a good idea!  So it's ready to download.  :)

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i39.tinypic.com/21ln2oh.jpg)

That's it, you just right click the graph where you want the new on-peak to be. Remember to have a current sample with no data, but the program will remind you if you forget.  8)
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on January 10, 2014, 01:46:55 pm
This is a handy feature where one can select only the first or second, etc elements for each spectrometer in a run:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i42.tinypic.com/2hz5v2b.jpg)

It is especially useful when setting up Probe Image to acquire multiple x-ray maps sets for more elements than one has spectrometers!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 26, 2014, 11:01:36 pm
This is a nice new feature...

Starting with version 10.2.4, Probe for EPMA will automatically read and save your instrument configuration files to the current probe database.

These config files aren't that large anyway, but have lots of useful information, so now one will be able to carry the complete instrument configuration files with your own data files, and these config "snapshots" can be added any time later from this menu if the config files are modified subsequently:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i42.tinypic.com/6oprmq.jpg)

The other aspect is that one can browse these different configuration files and if needed, also export these important config files, as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i42.tinypic.com/wk24ip.jpg)

for example on an off-line data processing computer perhaps for teaching purposes... the app will automatically change the instrument InterfaceType to "demonstration" for you.  8)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on January 29, 2014, 10:48:44 am
The config export dialog has been tweaked a little, so now one can view all the stored configuration files.

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/fdavxh.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on February 02, 2014, 01:35:47 pm
Along with the internally stored config files, PFE now automatically stores the standard compositions from the Standard.mdb composition database.

So if you happen to move your data file to another computer, the software will prompt you automatically and warn if any standards are missing and export the compositions if necessary.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on February 09, 2014, 05:04:28 pm
It's official!  We are "OK" with uncle Bill...
john

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i58.tinypic.com/ogvtra.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on February 14, 2014, 01:56:49 pm
Probe for EPMA has always had the best spectral interference correction for decades, but now it's even better. Thanks to suggestions from Karen Wright and Philipp Poeml, one can now apply spectral interference corrections to elements that utilize "virtual" standards.  What is a "virtual" standard?  Well it's a standard for an element that one doesn't physically have, e.g., a solid Xe standard...

For this procedure we utilize two other standards whose emission lines of the *same* family (KLM) "bracket" the emission line of interest, for example we might use Mg ka and Si ka on Mg and Si standards, to interpolate the intensity of an Al standard if we didn't have an Al standard (yes, all intensities are matrix corrected for best accuracy for the interpolation). Here is an example of this "test" of the virtual standard dialog from the Analytical menu in PFE:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i60.tinypic.com/2lni7u8.jpg)

In tests that I have performed on known materials, the accuracy varies with the emission line, but is around 5% accuracy, so much better than nothing! And once this virtual standard is specified properly, we obtain the following output for the Xe La measuring a LaPO4 standard where it is interfered by the La Ll line (*without* the spectral interference correction first):

St  823 Set   1 Lanthanum phosphate-2AA
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 20.0  Beam Current = 20.0  Beam Size =   20
(Magnification (analytical) =  20000),        Beam Mode = Analog  Spot
(Magnification (default) =      100, Magnification (imaging) =    200)
Image Shift (X,Y):                                          .00,   .00

Standard Description
Number of Data Lines:   1             Number of 'Good' Data Lines:   1
First/Last Date-Time: 02/13/2014 12:52:15 PM to 02/13/2014 12:52:15 PM
WARNING- Using Virtual Standard Intensity For Xe la

Average Total Oxygen:         .000     Average Total Weight%:  100.377
Average Calculated Oxygen:    .000     Average Atomic Number:   23.355
Average Excess Oxygen:        .000     Average Atomic Weight:   25.968
Average ZAF Iteration:        3.00     Average Quant Iterate:     2.00

St  823 Set   1 Lanthanum phosphate-2AA, Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Xe      La       P       O
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    SPEC    SPEC
BGDS:      LIN     LIN
TIME:    30.00   30.00
BEAM:    20.00   20.00

ELEM:       Xe      La       P       O   SUM 
     1    .395  26.812  29.910  43.260 100.377

AVER:     .395  26.812  29.910  43.260 100.377
SDEV:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
SERR:     .000    .000    .000    .000
%RSD:      .00     .00     .00     .00

PUBL:     n.a.  26.830  29.910  43.260 100.000
%VAR:      ---  (-.07)     .00     .00
DIFF:      ---  (-.02)    .000    .000
STDS:     1000     823       0       0

STKF:   1.0000   .2287   .0000   .0000
STCT:   363.12   16.84     .00     .00

UNKF:    .0033   .2287   .0000   .0000
UNCT:     1.22   16.84     .00     .00
UNBG:     1.13     .21     .00     .00

ZCOR:   1.1793  1.1725   .0000   .0000
KRAW:    .0033  1.0000   .0000   .0000
PKBG:     2.08   81.44     .00     .00


After applying spectral interference correction for La Ll on Xe La, we obtain this output with the interference on Xe properly corrected for:

St  823 Set   1 Lanthanum phosphate-2AA
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 20.0  Beam Current = 20.0  Beam Size =   20
(Magnification (analytical) =  20000),        Beam Mode = Analog  Spot
(Magnification (default) =      100, Magnification (imaging) =    200)
Image Shift (X,Y):                                          .00,   .00

Standard Description
Number of Data Lines:   1             Number of 'Good' Data Lines:   1
First/Last Date-Time: 02/13/2014 12:52:15 PM to 02/13/2014 12:52:15 PM
WARNING- Using Virtual Standard Intensity For Xe la

Average Total Oxygen:         .000     Average Total Weight%:  100.000
Average Calculated Oxygen:    .000     Average Atomic Number:   23.241
Average Excess Oxygen:        .000     Average Atomic Weight:   25.890
Average ZAF Iteration:        3.00     Average Quant Iterate:     3.00

St  823 Set   1 Lanthanum phosphate-2AA, Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Xe      La       P       O
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    SPEC    SPEC
BGDS:      LIN     LIN
TIME:    30.00   30.00
BEAM:    20.00   20.00

ELEM:       Xe      La       P       O   SUM 
     1    .000  26.830  29.910  43.260 100.000

AVER:     .000  26.830  29.910  43.260 100.000
SDEV:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
SERR:     .000    .000    .000    .000
%RSD:      .00     .00     .00     .00

PUBL:     n.a.  26.830  29.910  43.260 100.000
%VAR:      ---   (.00)     .00     .00
DIFF:      ---   (.00)    .000    .000
STDS:     1000     823       0       0

STKF:   1.0000   .2287   .0000   .0000
STCT:   363.12   16.84     .00     .00

UNKF:    .0000   .2287   .0000   .0000
UNCT:      .00   16.84     .00     .00
UNBG:     1.13     .21     .00     .00

ZCOR:   1.1801  1.1734   .0000   .0000
KRAW:    .0000  1.0000   .0000   .0000
PKBG:     1.00   81.44     .00     .00
INT%:  -100.00    ----    ----    ----


See this thread for more discussion on the virtual standard feature in Probe for EPMA:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=179.0
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on March 06, 2014, 02:30:11 pm
A new feature PHA acquisition feature is now available for Cameca (SX100 and SXFive) instruments. But first a minor "mea culpa"...

Last year I installed the new Thermo WDS mapping option for my NSS EDS system. Works very well, see here:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=77.msg284#msg284

This is because the Sx100 has TTL outputs available to connect to the Thermo WDS input BNC cables.  Subsequently I learned that the Cameca SXFive is different from the Sx100 is this respect and no longer provides TTL pulse outputs for WDS mapping by 3rd party applications. For some reason I mistakenly associated this change in the SXFive TTL output with the implementation of the Cameca PHA multi channel analyzer (MCA) acquisition hardware, but of course the Sx100 has always had this PHA MCA capability so I don't know where I got that idea...

Subsequently when I learned that JEOL, had also dropped their WDS TTL output capability in their new 8230/8530 instruments I wrongly assumed that they had also implemented this new PHA MCA hardware for PHA scanning acquisition.  But that was not the case... so although I've coded this new PHA MCA acquisition capability for both Cameca and JEOL instruments, it only works for JEOL in demo mode!

So what is PHA MCA?  Well the final result is no different than with the traditional baseline/window scan method, but it is *much* faster. Right now the SX100 function does not return the integration times so only raw counts are displayed, but we will soon implement a method that can return the elapsed time also, so we can display cps for the PHA scans as we currently do.

So like an EDS spectrum acquisition, one sees the same type of acquisition for the PHA scan, in that it improves the full spectrum precision over time (at least the way Probe Software has implemented the PHA MCA call).

Note that PFE will also perform this PHA MCA acquisition now in demo mode so even JEOL users can see for yourself.  What is nice about the demo mode is that it checks the emission line energy and if it is high enough to ionize Ar, it also shows the Ar escape peak correctly in the PHA MCa scan (no not for Xe yet, remember this is just demo mode!). Nice for teaching in off-line demo mode though.

Anyway, JEOL does not currently offer this very nice capability but for SX100/SXFive users, simply update to the latest PFE (10.2.9) and obtain the latest Cameca driver from Probe Software (v. 1.9.0).

Then simply edit the Probewin.ini file for the PHAHardwareType as shown here:

[pha]
PHAHardwareType=1        ; 0 = trad. PHA, 1 = MCA PHA acquisition

Here's what is looks like during acquisition:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/ixxvud.jpg)

Yeah, no visual difference once it's acquired as seen here, though a note is made of the PHA acquisition type:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/jahmc5.jpg)

Note that although the default PHA acquisition mode can be specified in the Probewin.ini file as shown above, one can also change it for the current probe run, by simply checking this box here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i58.tinypic.com/24o3nk6.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on March 07, 2014, 10:49:22 am
After some very limited testing I think 0.1 sec and 40 points seems to provide a nice fast PHA scan acquisition when using the new MCA PHA feature on Cameca instruments as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i60.tinypic.com/swfzg6.jpg)

To change your defaults to this in the Probewin.ini, these should be the settings:

[pha]
PHAHardwarePresent=1         ; non-zero = PHA baseline/window interface present
PHAHardwareType=1         ; 0 = traditional PHA acquisition, 1 = MCA PHA acquisition (Cameca only)

PHACountTime=0.1         ; default integration time for PHA acquisitions
PHAIntervals=40            ; default PHA intervals


Your MCA PHA acquisitions will then look like this:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/2hgzksm.jpg)

More details on testing of this new PHA acquisition feature here:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=217.0
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on March 17, 2014, 11:58:55 am
The last few version numbers of Probe for EPMA have a new feature that automatically saves the standard compositions to your probe database, so even if you forget to take a current copy of your standard.mdb file, you can still work the the data you acquired.

However, here is where "it gets a little sticky": when the program finds that there is a disagreement between the standard composition stored in the probe database and the standard composition stored in the probe database (because maybe the lab manager updated the standard database with a more accurate chemical characterization), it has to ask: which is the correct composition?

So please be prepared if you get this message:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i60.tinypic.com/2mxpmpw.jpg)

to answer Yes to update the internally stored composition with the externally stored Standard.mdb composition, No to export the internally stored composition, or Cancel to just close the MDB file.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 08, 2014, 02:00:49 pm
The Peak/Scan Options dialog now includes a button to force the wavescan ranges to include the Multi-Point Background positions as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/2emefwp.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 11, 2014, 12:10:46 pm
The latest version of Probe for EPMA will now automatically exclude samples (and elements) from the global MAN fit arrays, if they are deleted in the current probe run, when loading the default MAN assignments for the first time. 

This change was requested by Gareth Seward and it should not cause any issues under normal circumstances.   But if you are deleting and undeleting samples and changing the MAN assignments, you might want to use the Analytical |Clear MAN Assignments before clicking the Assign MAN Fits menu again in subsequent data processing.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 29, 2014, 01:01:43 pm
CalcImage can now output the "raw intensity" images to Surfer also.

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/fm2el1.jpg)

Output example is seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/1zfpvg0.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 29, 2014, 01:03:38 pm
One can now specify a "databar" from the Run | Image Display dialog as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/nvvc5.jpg)

Thanks to George Morgan for the suggestion.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on October 24, 2014, 04:46:23 pm
Per suggestions from Gareth Seward and Karsten Goemann I've modified the Fiducials selection dialog a bit.

This fiducial dialog is used to add, remove and modify fiducial calibration sets for specimen translation and rotation effects using three physical fiducial marks on the sample. Generally these are used for standard mounts, but they can also be used for unknown samples as well if you want to be sure to go back exactly to a previous position on a fine grained and/or complex specimen. Here is the new dialog with a new Assign button that will make things easier if you already have digitized positions and want to add fiducials:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/2qvwo4n.jpg)

Karsten will be posting a fiducial tutorial soon and when he does I'll add a "interactive help" button for it.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on October 25, 2014, 08:33:22 am
Another small tweak that I'm hoping will help users realize that the position samples listed in the Automate! window are *not* actually part of your probe database but instead are shared with all users and automatically saved to the position.mdb file:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/156tzrb.jpg)

Generally, users should clear this position database (unless the next user is perhaps planning on using the same standard mount in the same sample block location), using the Delete All button and then import the appropriate standard positions from a previously exported .POS file.

As mentioned above Karsten will be posting a short tutorial on utilizing standard POS files and fiducials here:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=46.0

In the meantime there are some posts in that topic worth reading...
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on October 31, 2014, 03:48:27 pm
The Move window now has controls for inserting and removing the EDS detector if your EDS spectrometer has motion control.  Right now only the Bruker hardware is supported, but to enable the buttons, you will have to add a new keyword to the [hardware] section of the Probewin.ini file amd change the value to non-zero.

EDSInsertRetractPresent=0

Otherwise the buttons will be disabled as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i60.tinypic.com/augygo.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on October 31, 2014, 03:54:25 pm
I also added calls to get/set the maximum energy and maximum pulse throughput in the Acquisition Options dialog from the Acquire! window as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/28hop6v.jpg)

Right now only the Bruker hardware works for set and get, the Thermo hardware gets and sets all except for setting the max pulse throughput which will get released in version 3.3 of NSS.

Remember, to utilize these API calls you will need these two keywords added to the [hardware] section of your Probewin.ini file and then set them to a non-zero value:

EDSInsertRetractPresent=0       ; indicate EDS detector insert/retract hardware
EDSMaxEnergyThroughputPresent=0 ; indicate EDS detector get/set max energy and pulse processing
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on October 31, 2014, 04:01:28 pm
And here is where the new Import *.DCD Files button now is (I moved both the .LEP and .DCD position import to the Automate! windows in PFE and Stage as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/315ly81.jpg)

This button allows one to import ASCII sample position files created by Graham Hutchison's Microbeam Services optical stage digitized hardware/software.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 18, 2014, 09:55:17 pm
This isn't so much a new feature as it is a cleaning up of the output for EDS and WDS integrated samples.

If you have both analyzed EDS and WDS elements in your run, the output for say the Data button in the Analyze! window will look like this:

Un    7 Mg2SiO4
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Beam Current = 20.0  Beam Size =   10
(Magnification (analytical) =  20000),        Beam Mode = Analog  Spot
(Magnification (default) =     2524, Magnification (imaging) =    736)
Image Shift (X,Y):                                          .00,   .00
Number of Data Lines:   3             Number of 'Good' Data Lines:   3
First/Last Date-Time: 02/19/2013 04:18:02 PM to 02/19/2013 04:23:47 PM

Stage (or Beam Deflection) Coordinate Positions:
          X          Y          Z                 X          Y          Z
   18G   12260.00  -4962.000   11.00000    19G   12184.00  -4958.000   11.00000
   20G   12145.00  -4958.000   11.00000

Sample Coordinates Referenced to Fiducial Set  2 C:\UserData\StandardPOSData\alkali-glass_pos4.pos
 1  13206.0 4623.00 -26.000
 2  19447.0 -4695.0 -61.000
 3  6142.00 -4967.0 17.0000

Sample is a Time Dependent Intensity (TDI) Self-Calibration Acquisition Type Sample

On and Off Peak Positions:
ELEM:    na ka    k ka   ca ka   mn ka   ti ka   mg ka   si ka
ONPEAK 46273.0 42618.0 38444.0 23831.0 68281.0 .000000 .000000
OFFSET 89.8477 158.785 -44.414 208.352 10.3984 .000000 .000000
HIPEAK 47601.0 43683.0 39895.5 25367.9 68772.5 .000000 .000000
LOPEAK 44687.3 41392.0 37178.4 22782.5 67593.0 .000000 .000000
HI-OFF 1328.00 1065.02 1451.48 1536.89 491.500 .000000 .000000
LO-OFF -1585.7 -1226.0 -1265.6 -1048.5 -687.96 .000000 .000000

PHA Parameters:
ELEM:    na ka    k ka   ca ka   mn ka   ti ka   mg ka   si ka
DEAD:     3.00    3.31    3.25    3.31    2.97     .00     .00
BASE:      .56     .56     .56     .50     .56     .00     .00
WINDOW    4.00    4.00    4.00    4.00    4.00     .00     .00
MODE:       -1      -1      -1      -1      -1       0       0
GAIN:    2321.   1181.    567.    780.    700.       .       .
BIAS:    1300.   1850.   1330.   1850.   1840.       .       .

Last (Current) On and Off Peak Count Times:
ELEM:    na ka    k ka   ca ka   mn ka   ti ka   mg ka   si ka
BGD:       OFF     OFF     OFF     OFF     OFF     EDS     EDS
BGDS:      LIN     LIN     LIN     LIN     LIN     EDS     EDS
SPEC:        1       3       2       3       5       0       0
CRYST:     TAP    LPET    LPET    LPET     LIF     EDS     EDS
ORDER:       1       1       1       2       1       1       1
ONTIM:   20.00   10.00   20.00   10.00   12.00   80.00   80.00
HITIM:    5.00    5.00    5.00    5.00    3.00   40.00   40.00
LOTIM:    5.00    5.00    5.00    5.00    3.00   40.00   40.00
UNFAC:       3       2       3       2       4       1       1
ONTIME   60.00   20.00   60.00   20.00   48.00   80.00   80.00
HITIME   15.00   10.00   15.00   10.00   12.00   40.00   40.00
LOTIME   15.00   10.00   15.00   10.00   12.00   40.00   40.00

Miscellaneous Sample Acquisition/Calculation Parameters:
KILO:    15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00
ENERGY   1.041   3.313   3.691   5.895   4.509   1.254   1.740
EDGE:    1.073   3.608   4.039   6.539   4.967   1.305   1.839
Eo/Ec:   13.98    4.16    3.71    2.29    3.02   11.49    8.16
STDS:      336     374     358      25      22      12      14
TDI#:       -1      -1      -1       0      -1       0       0

EDS Spectrum Parameters (for datarow=1):
Time Constant=     0,  Clock Time=  50.0
Elapsed Time= 126.2, Dead Time(%)=   37.
Live Time=  80.0,        Channels=  2048
Ev Per Chan=    10,  Max Counts=  211125

On-Peak (off-peak corrected) or MAN On-Peak X-ray Counts (cps/1nA) (and Faraday Current):
ELEM:    na ka    k ka   ca ka   mn ka   ti ka   mg ka   si ka   BEAM
BGD:       OFF     OFF     OFF     OFF     OFF     EDS     EDS
SPEC:        1       3       2       3       5       0       0
CRYST:     TAP    LPET    LPET    LPET     LIF     EDS     EDS
ORDER:       1       1       1       2       1       1       1
   18G    -.03     .13     .14    -.38    -.01  998.44  489.54  20.019
   19G    -.03     .00     .18     .02     .00 1000.83  489.85  20.014
   20G    -.02     .04     .15     .16     .00  996.85  488.16  20.014

AVER:     -.03     .06     .16    -.06     .00  998.71  489.18  20.016
SDEV:      .01     .07     .02     .28     .01    2.01     .90    .003
1SIG:      .02     .05     .03     .11     .01     .79     .55
SIGR:      .38    1.43     .82    2.61     .77    2.54    1.63
SERR:      .00     .04     .01     .16     .00    1.16     .52
%RSD:   -23.90  115.87   15.58 -442.29 -132.10     .20     .18

Off-Peak (calculated) X-ray Counts (cps/1nA):
ELEM:    na ka    k ka   ca ka   mn ka   ti ka   mg ka   si ka
TYPE:   LINEAR  LINEAR  LINEAR  LINEAR  LINEAR AVERAGE AVERAGE
   18G     .36     .85     .90    4.84     .06     .00     .00
   19G     .35     .84     .92    4.72     .06     .00     .00
   20G     .35     .80     .89    4.59     .05     .00     .00

AVER:      .36     .83     .90    4.72     .06     .00     .00
SDEV:      .01     .03     .02     .12     .01     .00     .00

Raw Hi-Peak X-ray Counts (cps/1nA):
ELEM:    na ka    k ka   ca ka   mn ka   ti ka   mg ka   si ka
   18G     .36     .77     .82    4.39     .07     .00     .00
   19G     .28     .81     .84    4.21     .08     .00     .00
   20G     .31     .81     .81    3.97     .05     .00     .00

AVER:      .32     .80     .82    4.19     .07     .00     .00
SDEV:      .04     .02     .02     .21     .02     .00     .00
1SIG:      .03     .06     .05     .14     .02     .00     .00
SIGR:     1.24     .35     .29    1.45    1.05     .00     .00

Raw Lo-Peak X-ray Counts (cps/1nA):
ELEM:    na ka    k ka   ca ka   mn ka   ti ka   mg ka   si ka
   18G     .37     .94     .97    5.15     .04     .00     .00
   19G     .44     .88    1.00    5.06     .04     .00     .00
   20G     .39     .80     .96    5.02     .05     .00     .00

AVER:      .40     .87     .98    5.08     .04     .00     .00
SDEV:      .04     .07     .02     .07     .01     .00     .00
1SIG:      .04     .07     .06     .16     .01     .00     .00
SIGR:      .97    1.06     .36     .41     .48     .00     .00

Note that the peak positions and PHA parameters for the Mg Ka and Si Ka (as EDS elements) are zeros because, they aren't "useful". I'll probably make them dashes at some point (along with the off-peak intensity output)... which reminds me: I wish Thermo (and Bruker?) software sent back the EDS background intensities so I can calculate statistics for the EDS elements...

But if you decide to run PFE using *only* EDS elements (that is, no WDS elements), then it makes no sense to output the peak positions and PHA parameters at all, so this is the output you will now see for EDS only elements in PFE:

St  912 Set   1 MgO (elemental) (#12)
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Beam Current = 30.0  Beam Size =    0
(Magnification (analytical) =  40000),        Beam Mode = Analog  Spot
(Magnification (default) =      400, Magnification (imaging) =    800)
Image Shift (X,Y):                                          .00,   .00

1. UCB # M3567, 99.8%, EPMA (UCB): Ca ~ 0.2%
2. C. M. Taylor, 99.98%, EPMA (UCB) Ca ~ 0.02%
Number of Data Lines:   4             Number of 'Good' Data Lines:   4
First/Last Date-Time: 11/17/2014 06:17:30 PM to 11/17/2014 06:24:24 PM

Stage (or Beam Deflection) Coordinate Positions:
          X          Y          Z                 X          Y          Z
   26G  -13078.00   26512.00   19.00000    27G  -13074.00   26512.00   19.00000
   28G  -13070.00   26512.00   19.00000    29G  -13066.00   26512.00   19.00000

Sample Coordinates Referenced to Fiducial Set  1 C:\UserData\StandardPOSData\STBLK1_pos1.pos

Last (Current) On and Off Peak Count Times:
ELEM:    ni ka   cr ka   co ka   fe ka   cu ka   al ka    o ka
BGD:       EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS
BGDS:      EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS
SPEC:        0       0       0       0       0       0       0
CRYST:     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS
ORDER:       1       1       1       1       1       1       1
ONTIM:   59.90   59.90   59.90   59.90   59.90   59.90   59.90
HITIM:   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95
LOTIM:   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95   29.95

Miscellaneous Sample Acquisition/Calculation Parameters:
KILO:    15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00   15.00
ENERGY   7.473   5.412   6.926   6.400   8.041   1.487    .525
EDGE:    8.333   5.990   7.709   7.112   8.979   1.560    .532
Eo/Ec:    1.80    2.50    1.95    2.11    1.67    9.62   28.21
STDS:      528     524     527     526     529     513     912

EDS Spectrum Parameters (for datarow=1):
Time Constant=     0,  Clock Time=  60.0
Elapsed Time= 125.7, Dead Time(%)=   52.
Live Time=  60.0,        Channels=  2048
Ev Per Chan=    10,  Max Counts=  389132

ELEM:    ni ka   cr ka   co ka   fe ka   cu ka   al ka    o ka   BEAM
BGD:       EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS     EDS
   26G     .00     .00     .00     .09     .17     .00  368.54  29.916
   27G     .00     .00     .04     .18     .00     .00  368.86  29.911
   28G     .00     .00     .00     .27     .11     .00  372.59  29.908
   29G     .21     .00     .18     .00     .00     .00  369.28  29.902

AVER:      .05     .00     .05     .14     .07     .00  369.82  29.909
SDEV:      .11     .00     .09     .12     .09     .00    1.87    .006
1SIG:      .01     .00     .01     .01     .01     .00     .45
SIGR:    19.51     .00   15.54   13.43   13.67     .00    4.13
SERR:      .05     .00     .04     .06     .04     .00     .94
%RSD:   200.00     .00  158.28   86.27  121.83     .00     .51

A little more compact I think you all will agree!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 29, 2014, 02:02:09 pm
As many of you already know, the Digitize Image feature, described here:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=70.msg263#msg263

can be used to first acquire a BSE, SE or other image on your sample and then simply utilize the mouse to select stage coordinate positions (single points, traverses and polygon grids) on the image for subsequent automated acquisition from the Automate! window using either stage motion or stage motion and beam deflection.

But what if one has already digitized sample positions using either the manual random points, linear traverse, rectangular grid, polygon grid, or "shotgun" methods from the Digitize window and you would like to see where those already digitized positions plot on an image of the sample?

Previously, one could first acquire an image from the Acquire! window using the Imaging button, then save that image as a BMP file to disk, then load that BMP file image into PictureSnap and then select one of the position sample types to display the desired position sample type from the PictureSnap Display menu and you would be able to see where they fall on the sample...  whew!

Well, now there is another way that is super easy!  Simply acquire an image of the area of interest using the Imaging button in the Acquire! window at whatever mag you want, then simply click the Plot Digitized Positions checkbox as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/11100oi.jpg)

and voila, the position sample coordinates for the sample type displayed in the Automate! window are automatically plotted!  Cool.   8)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 02, 2015, 07:55:57 pm
This is a really cool new feature for automating presentation output for large numbers of traverse samples. From the Output menu select the new Output Automatic Traverse Plots as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i60.tinypic.com/2lkpjb7.jpg)

After the analysis data has been output, this dialog will appear:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/105we4i.jpg)

Select the options you want and click OK. The program will ask if you want to run the output script in Grapher. An example of the presentation output is seen attached below (remember to login to see attachments!).

I should mention the selection of the "customizable" Grapher script templates isn't implemented yet. Probably tomorrow...

Also, I should mention that this Grapher script runs much too slowly right now. We'll start optimizing it soon, but I wanted to get the feature out there for feedback and heck, automated output is always useful even if it is a little slow!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 03, 2015, 03:04:25 pm
Ok, I added support for customized traverse scripts and here is an example with 9 plots per page generated automatically (see attached below).
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (condition order)
Post by: John Donovan on January 19, 2015, 04:50:29 pm
Based on David Steel and Karsten Goemann's input I think I have a new version that consists of a major write of the acquisition and display code to allow the program to consider "condition order" as a new parameter.

Here is an example of the new code processing a "sparse" field of elements at 4 different conditions:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i58.tinypic.com/ye2s0.jpg)

You will note that there are some new fields such as the condition grid and a graphic that shows the current acquisition order. The same graphic is available from the Acquisition Option dialog and the spectrometer order controls can now be applied to combined condition samples as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/9h801i.jpg)

The same graphics with the conditions in red are also seen during acquisition:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/2nva24o.jpg)

The same features also apply to more typical samples as seen here with two conditions:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/9vlg85.jpg)

I've tested a large number of functions and everything seems good to go, but I'm sure there is bound to be some tweaking to get everything perfect so who will be the first to try?

Note that at the moment I am only uploading the installer files to our beta testing site.  David: if you'd like to try this, I'm sure Karsten can help you out.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 20, 2015, 08:54:05 pm
Here's an aspect to the new acquisition code that took me a bit before I realized that it was correct and I was wrong!

Because one can now sort the elements within each condition, I tried some testing with the following amphibole example here in descending spectrometer position order, so Na and Si are first:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/xgcpll.jpg)

Now I switched it to ascending spectrometer position order as seen here but at first was stumped by the Mg now being the longer acquisition time as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/1r6iw4.jpg)

The I remembered that I had the TDI time dependent intensity option turned on and so the first element takes longer because of the additional overhead! Normally this wouldn't be noticable but I had set the number of TDI intervals set to 40...

Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on January 21, 2015, 02:26:22 pm
Just FYI, Julie and I are now officially running v. 10.6.6 on our SX100 and everything seems fine with the new acquisition code... beta testers please continue to test!
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on January 27, 2015, 12:25:12 pm
The latest v. 10.6.8 is out for our beta testers but in the meantime allow me to show one of the many useful new features in this version.

When using combined condition samples, that is, samples with multiple analytical or column conditions, the program will display all condition sets found as they are edited.

Previously to change the conditions for a set of elements, one had to select each element and specify the new conditions and then click the Apply button. Now one can simply one of the elements in that condition and click the Apply Conditions To All Elements button to change the condition for all other elements sharing that condition number as seen here with the original condition set to 30 nA:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/21n3880.jpg)

and then after changing the beam current to 40 nA and clicking the Apply Conditions To All Elements button as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/dpu553.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (v. 10.6.9)
Post by: John Donovan on January 30, 2015, 12:19:30 pm
All,
The latest PFE v. 10.6.9 is ready to download.

It includes a large number of nice changes.  For example the element acquisition graphics are improved as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/2i78m14.jpg)

Ready for JEOL and Cameca users to update from your Help menu.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on February 07, 2015, 10:56:06 pm
Paul Carpenter found a problem in the fluorescence correction which is fixed.

If you downloaded PFE or CalcZAF in the last week, please update again.

Thanks.
john

Edit: Since I didn't bump the version number for this fix, if you previously installed v. 10.6.9, you'll have to update twice to force a "repair" on the installation to get a proper update.  Sorry!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (absorbed current)
Post by: John Donovan on February 27, 2015, 02:13:54 pm
Now in v. 10.7.5 PFE will automatically acquire absorbed currents during TDI and alternating on/off acquisitions.

From the Run | Display Time Dependent (TDI) and... menu you can see the data as shown here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/sctkjq.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (absorbed current)
Post by: John Donovan on March 03, 2015, 06:17:31 pm
I've added new check boxes to output both beam and absorbed current measurements. Combined condition samples will have a different beam current and absorbed current for each condition.

For example if you acquire a normal sample without absorbed current, the data output will now look like this:

On-Peak (off-peak corrected) or MAN On-Peak X-ray Counts (cps/1nA) (and Faraday/Absorbed Currents):
ELEM:     o ka   mo la   nb la   ta la   zr la   ti ka   BEAM1 BEAM2
BGD:       OFF     OFF     OFF     OFF     OFF     OFF
SPEC:        1       2       2       3       4       5
CRYST:     PC1    LPET    LPET    LLIF     PET     LIF
ORDER:       1       1       2       1       1       1
  166G    4.22     .55  354.47     .45    -.04     .31  29.942 29.939
  167G    3.50     .26  353.02     .37    -.05     .34  29.940 29.940
  168G    3.78     .48  353.68     .34    -.05     .43  29.939 29.939
  169G    3.89     .55  348.08     .40    -.10    2.32  29.943 29.942
  170G    3.94     .26  319.75     .34    -.04   15.24  29.940 29.937
  171G    4.49     .36  234.83     .46    -.03   52.23  29.937 29.943
  172G    4.31     .28  202.24     .37     .00   66.92  29.942 29.940
  173G    4.07     .19  160.32     .30    -.02   85.47  29.940 29.937
  174G    3.98     .09  152.36     .19    -.01   90.38  29.939 29.943
  175G    3.73     .17  143.48     .15    -.01   94.09  29.939 29.939
  176G    3.72     .09  136.56     .15     .00   97.18  29.942 29.940
  177G    3.49     .10  132.06     .19    -.01   99.64  29.939 29.940
  178G    3.71     .16  127.13     .11    -.06  102.87  29.934 29.943
  179G    3.59    -.06  123.72    -.01    -.05  104.13  29.945 29.933
  180G    3.71     .08  120.16     .24    -.02  106.32  29.939 29.940

AVER:     3.87     .24  217.46     .27    -.03   61.19  29.940 29.940
SDEV:      .29     .18   98.92     .14     .03   44.49    .003 .003
1SIG:      .08     .04     .60     .07     .01     .20
SIGR:     3.86    4.01  165.56    1.93    2.15  220.06
SERR:      .08     .05   25.54     .04     .01   11.49
%RSD:     7.60   76.19   45.49   50.57  -77.77   72.70


Notice the new headers showing the before and after beam current measurements.  Also the user specified output now had these check boxes:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i61.tinypic.com/24bm97r.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on March 05, 2015, 07:08:56 pm
This is a nice new feature for the Multi-Point background (MPB) method. 

Now PFE will circle the data points actually utilized in the background regression as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/vy1jy8.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on March 09, 2015, 07:06:34 pm
I've started to split the wavescan plotting from the std/unk plotting.  Here is what the new Plot! window looks like now:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i60.tinypic.com/ioeoop.jpg)

The main difference is that this new Plot! window for wavescans, is that it treats *samples* as Y data sets, as opposed to the old Plot! window which treated multiple Y data types as data sets.

The old Plot! window for std and unk data type plotting is now accessed from the Output menu.  It still contains the old wavescan code which I will remove this weekend.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on March 10, 2015, 07:35:12 pm
This is a very small feature, but I think very useful.

Have you ever wanted to navigate small distances in the Automate! window, maybe using the Go button, but the beam is blanked automatically each time the stage moves?  Well, now you can just check this box as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/14ufign.jpg)

and the beam will stay on for both Go button clicks and also on double clicks on single positions in the grid control. 

Useful for confirming say traverse start and end points before acquisition.

On a related note I also decided to make the existing checkbox in the StageMap window default to using the beam blank when moving the stage.  I've double-clicked there too many times and watched a line drawn on the sample mount as it moves to the new location!

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/eafpjs.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (Automate! window standard list)
Post by: John Donovan on March 19, 2015, 11:13:10 am
All,
I modified the Automate! (and Position!) window standard lists so the standard numbers now list in numerical order. This was accomplished by prefixing zeros in front of the std numbers as suggested by Graham Hutchison:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/rjebrn.jpg)

Download v. 10.7.9 when ready.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (export config)
Post by: John Donovan on March 27, 2015, 12:43:41 pm
The latest version of PFE now allows one to export all config files to the PFE app folder from the File menu as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/hs7215.jpg)

This may be useful for updating off-line computers for data processing or exporting selected config files to the user data file folder as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/257zxqs.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on April 09, 2015, 10:20:44 am
Here's a cool new feature in PFE from the Calculation Options dialog: one can now specify not only an element (or element oxide) by difference from 100%, but also a formula by difference from 100%, for example, Li2B4O7 by difference as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/20kvgh5.jpg)

Without the formula Li2B4O7 by difference, this is what one might see measuring traces in a lithium borate flux:

Un    4 unknown sample, Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Cl       S       K      Ca       V       O       B      Li
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    CALC    SPEC    SPEC
BGDS:      LIN     LIN     LIN     LIN     LIN
TIME:    10.00   10.00   10.00   10.00   10.00
BEAM:    30.00   30.00   30.00   30.00   30.00

ELEM:       Cl       S       K      Ca       V       O       B      Li   SUM
    12    .034    .109    .974    .027    .180    .458    .000    .000   1.782
    13    .021    .338    .994    .138    .186    .852    .000    .000   2.529

AVER:     .027    .224    .984    .083    .183    .655    .000    .000   2.155
SDEV:     .009    .162    .014    .078    .004    .278    .000    .000    .528
SERR:     .006    .114    .010    .055    .003    .197    .000    .000
%RSD:    32.25   72.32    1.42   94.83    2.43   42.50     .00     .00
STDS:      285     730     374     468      23       0       0       0

STKF:    .0601   .5061   .1132   .0684   .6328   .0000   .0000   .0000
STCT:    19.96  169.08   37.88   23.04  210.31     .00     .00     .00

UNKF:    .0003   .0022   .0093   .0007   .0015   .0000   .0000   .0000
UNCT:      .09     .73    3.13     .24     .50     .00     .00     .00
UNBG:      .96    1.70     .94    1.15    1.54     .00     .00     .00

ZCOR:   1.0582  1.0145  1.0526  1.1561  1.2074   .0000   .0000   .0000
KRAW:    .0043   .0043   .0826   .0105   .0024   .0000   .0000   .0000
PKBG:     1.09    1.43    4.35    1.21    1.33     .00     .00     .00


With the Li2B4O7 by difference we obtain this analysis:

Un    4 unknown sample, Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Cl       S       K      Ca       V       O       B      Li
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    FORM    FORM    FORM
BGDS:      LIN     LIN     LIN     LIN     LIN
TIME:    10.00   10.00   10.00   10.00   10.00
BEAM:    30.00   30.00   30.00   30.00   30.00

ELEM:       Cl       S       K      Ca       V       O       B      Li   SUM
    12    .037    .118   1.027    .025    .182  65.788  25.215   8.092 100.483
    13    .022    .360   1.028    .130    .188  65.970  25.128   8.064 100.889

AVER:     .029    .239   1.027    .078    .185  65.879  25.171   8.078 100.686
SDEV:     .011    .171    .001    .074    .004    .129    .061    .020    .287
SERR:     .007    .121    .001    .053    .003    .091    .043    .014
%RSD:    36.28   71.40     .09   95.52    2.17     .20     .24     .24
STDS:      285     730     374     468      23       0       0       0

STKF:    .0601   .5061   .1132   .0684   .6328   .0000   .0000   .0000
STCT:    19.96  169.08   37.88   23.04  210.31     .00     .00     .00

UNKF:    .0003   .0022   .0093   .0007   .0015   .0000   .0000   .0000
UNCT:      .09     .73    3.13     .24     .50     .00     .00     .00
UNBG:      .96    1.70     .94    1.15    1.54     .00     .00     .00

ZCOR:   1.1184  1.0881  1.0993  1.0801  1.2216   .0000   .0000   .0000
KRAW:    .0043   .0043   .0826   .0105   .0024   .0000   .0000   .0000
PKBG:     1.09    1.43    4.35    1.21    1.33     .00     .00     .00

Un    4 unknown sample, Results Based on 2 Atoms of li

ELEM:       Cl       S       K      Ca       V       O       B      Li   SUM
    12    .002    .006    .045    .001    .006   7.052   4.000   2.000  13.112
    13    .001    .019    .045    .006    .006   7.096   4.000   2.000  13.173

AVER:     .001    .013    .045    .003    .006   7.074   4.000   2.000  13.143
SDEV:     .001    .009    .000    .003    .000    .031    .000    .000    .043
SERR:     .000    .006    .000    .002    .000    .022    .000    .000
%RSD:    36.06   71.58     .33   95.65    2.42     .44     .00     .00
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on April 13, 2015, 06:55:53 pm
Here's a nice new feature suggested by Julie Chouinard that allows the user to have the software not normalize the specified element concentrations for particle corrections as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/2i891kw.jpg)

So, let's take a look. Here are some asbestos data without a particle correction.  The fiber sizes vary, but were in the ball park of a few microns.  If we had the correct fiber diameter specified for each data point the totals would be much closer to 100%, but the geometry effect correction is roughly the same for similar sized fibers (or particles).

ELEM:       Na       K      Al      Fe      Si      Mg      Ca       O       H
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    ANAL    CALC    SPEC
BGDS:      MAN     LIN     MAN     MAN     MAN     MAN     MAN
TIME:   120.00   40.00  120.00  120.00   90.00   90.00   90.00
BEAM:    10.05   10.05   10.05   10.05   10.05   10.05   10.05

ELEM:       Na       K      Al      Fe      Si      Mg      Ca       O       H   SUM 
   152    .017    .269    .406    .030   1.614    .028    .159  19.226   2.126  23.876
   153    .045    .447    .832    .592   3.322    .235    .239  21.927   2.126  29.766
   154    .101   1.180   1.961    .143   6.609    .172   1.229  27.070   2.126  40.591
   155    .006    .025    .055    .016    .178    .001    .021  17.146   2.126  19.574
   156    .058    .901   1.224    .051   5.172    .070    .471  24.309   2.126  34.382
   157    .020    .126    .203    .004    .877    .004    .073  18.120   2.126  21.553
   158    .082   1.335   2.447    .131  12.609    .119    .773  34.142   2.126  53.764
   159    .070    .184    .250    .013   1.098    .016    .119  18.471   2.126  22.347
   160    .013    .394    .505    .055   2.925    .089    .451  20.996   2.126  27.555
   161    .047    .551    .959    .014   3.517    .042    .397  22.053   2.126  29.707
   162    .123   2.299   4.300    .191  15.954    .219   3.363  40.931   2.126  69.505
   163    .041    .020    .010   -.011    .152    .007   -.001  17.075   2.126  19.419
   164    .039    .040    .077    .096    .407    .051    .042  17.505   2.126  20.382
   165    .030    .001    .015    .005    .069   -.002   -.006  16.973   2.126  19.210
   166    .063   1.033   1.895    .211   7.976    .189    .698  28.344   2.126  42.534
   167   -.005    .019    .032   -.013    .184    .006    .003  17.116   2.126  19.468
   168    .039    .015    .041   -.014    .231    .006    .001  17.190   2.126  19.633

AVER:     .046    .520    .895    .089   3.700    .074    .472  22.270   2.126  30.192
SDEV:     .034    .639   1.171    .148   4.689    .083    .821   6.857    .000


Note the ratio between the averages and standard deviations. Note also that 19% H2O has been specified to the matrix since this is an amphibole asbestos and that is about what it should have. Now we apply the particle correction assuming a 3 um diameter rod or fiber:

ELEM:       Na       K      Al      Fe      Si      Mg      Ca       O       H   SUM 
   152    .149   1.800   2.731    .371  10.758    .271   1.231  75.214   7.476 100.000
   153    .227   2.176   3.951   2.693  15.971   1.091   1.281  67.198   5.413 100.000
   154    .301   3.789   6.087    .529  20.901    .556   3.971  60.324   3.542 100.000
   155    .118    .233    .732    .384   1.870    .145    .441  85.690  10.387 100.000
   156    .229   3.577   4.733    .322  20.301    .319   1.951  64.167   4.402 100.000
   157    .187    .992   1.713    .249   6.971    .150    .776  80.150   8.812 100.000
   158    .185   3.007   5.395    .356  28.204    .290   1.782  58.301   2.480 100.000
   159    .470   1.362   1.946    .306   8.183    .219   1.071  78.130   8.313 100.000
   160    .109   2.128   2.720    .439  15.632    .515   2.546  69.900   6.012 100.000
   161    .229   2.673   4.539    .226  16.875    .267   2.029  67.765   5.396 100.000
   162    .196   3.864   7.020    .360  26.412    .371   5.597  54.345   1.836 100.000
   163    .373    .188    .345    .189   1.653    .198    .247  86.270  10.537 100.000
   164    .329    .344    .857    .986   3.682    .521    .591  82.991   9.700 100.000
   165    .299    .006    .395    .330    .910    .127    .200  86.993  10.740 100.000
   166    .191   3.114   5.556    .682  23.781    .571   2.161  60.612   3.331 100.000
   167    .034    .177    .535    .180   1.941    .193    .276  86.186  10.478 100.000
   168    .349    .134    .609    .170   2.330    .188    .256  85.631  10.333 100.000

AVER:     .234   1.739   2.933    .516  12.140    .352   1.553  73.522   7.011 100.000
SDEV:     .109   1.418   2.270    .596   9.512    .242   1.458  11.376   3.153    .000


The relative variance of the different data points is less and therefore improved, but note however that the specified H2O is also being normalized along with the measured elements and this is not physically realistic, so we turn on the "Do Not Normalize Specified Element Concentrations..." check box and now get an even further improved data set as seen here:


Un    4 Rome, OR, Results in Normalized Elemental Weight Percents (Particle Corrections)

ELEM:       Na       K      Al      Fe      Si      Mg      Ca       O       H   SUM 
   152    .363   4.392   6.664    .905  26.252    .662   3.005  55.631   2.126 100.000
   153    .357   3.413   6.200   4.225  25.058   1.711   2.010  54.900   2.126 100.000
   154    .356   4.491   7.214    .627  24.772    .659   4.706  55.049   2.126 100.000
   155   1.331   2.633   8.260   4.339  21.111   1.638   4.976  53.585   2.126 100.000
   156    .305   4.776   6.320    .430  27.106    .426   2.605  55.906   2.126 100.000
   157    .713   3.782   6.530    .947  26.568    .572   2.958  55.803   2.126 100.000
   158    .192   3.129   5.614    .370  29.351    .302   1.855  57.061   2.126 100.000
   159   1.480   4.291   6.130    .963  25.778    .689   3.375  55.167   2.126 100.000
   160    .191   3.724   4.761    .768  27.364    .902   4.457  55.707   2.126 100.000
   161    .358   4.181   7.101    .354  26.398    .418   3.174  55.890   2.126 100.000
   162    .190   3.744   6.802    .349  25.592    .359   5.423  55.416   2.126 100.000
   163   5.177   2.614   4.788   2.626  22.951   2.747   3.424  53.546   2.126 100.000
   164   2.002   2.090   5.215   6.002  22.401   3.168   3.595  53.400   2.126 100.000
   165   6.020    .120   7.954   6.645  18.352   2.568   4.032  52.182   2.126 100.000
   166    .220   3.592   6.408    .787  27.427    .658   2.492  56.289   2.126 100.000
   167    .436   2.253   6.811   2.290  24.722   2.458   3.516  55.389   2.126 100.000
   168   3.691   1.421   6.442   1.798  24.653   1.987   2.709  55.172   2.126 100.000

AVER:    1.375   3.215   6.424   2.025  25.050   1.290   3.430  55.064   2.126 100.000
SDEV:    1.836   1.232    .964   2.051   2.649    .968   1.015   1.225    .000    .000

Un    4 Rome, OR, Results in Normalized Oxide Weight Percents (Particle Corrections)

ELEM:     Na2O     K2O   Al2O3     FeO    SiO2     MgO     CaO       O     H2O   SUM 
   152    .490   5.290  12.592   1.164  56.163   1.097   4.204    .000  19.000 100.000
   153    .481   4.112  11.714   5.435  53.608   2.838   2.812    .000  19.000 100.000
   154    .480   5.410  13.631    .807  52.995   1.092   6.585    .000  19.000 100.000
   155   1.795   3.172  15.608   5.583  45.165   2.716   6.962    .000  19.000 100.000
   156    .412   5.754  11.941    .554  57.989    .707   3.644    .000  19.000 100.000
   157    .962   4.556  12.338   1.219  56.838    .948   4.140    .000  19.000 100.000
   158    .259   3.769  10.608    .476  62.792    .500   2.595    .000  19.000 100.000
   159   1.995   5.169  11.583   1.239  55.148   1.143   4.722    .000  19.000 100.000
   160    .257   4.486   8.995    .988  58.542   1.496   6.236    .000  19.000 100.000
   161    .482   5.037  13.417    .456  56.474    .693   4.442    .000  19.000 100.000
   162    .255   4.510  12.852    .449  54.751    .595   7.588    .000  19.000 100.000
   163   6.979   3.149   9.047   3.378  49.101   4.555   4.791    .000  19.000 100.000
   164   2.699   2.518   9.853   7.722  47.924   5.253   5.031    .000  19.000 100.000
   165   8.115    .145  15.029   8.549  39.261   4.259   5.642    .000  19.000 100.000
   166    .297   4.327  12.108   1.013  58.677   1.092   3.487    .000  19.000 100.000
   167    .587   2.715  12.869   2.946  52.889   4.075   4.919    .000  19.000 100.000
   168   4.975   1.712  12.171   2.314  52.742   3.295   3.790    .000  19.000 100.000

AVER:    1.854   3.872  12.139   2.605  53.592   2.139   4.799    .000  19.000 100.000
SDEV:    2.475   1.484   1.821   2.639   5.667   1.606   1.421    .000    .000    .000


Pretty cool actually!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on April 18, 2015, 01:20:39 pm
Here's a useful idea:

Create a Probe for EPMA run database and name it something like "PFE Configuration History.MDB" and save it to your user data folder.

Then whenever you make any changes to your PFE config files (Probewin.ini, Scalers.dat, Motors.dat, etc.), open this database up and click the File | Import Probe Configuration Files menu as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i61.tinypic.com/2mx4t2h.jpg)

and the program will save a complete copy of your modified files. For future posterity of course!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (time estimation)
Post by: Probeman on May 05, 2015, 11:43:05 am
I have improved the time estimation code in PFE for both individual points and also automated acquisition.  I think the accuracy is around 5% at this time, but that may vary from instrument to instrument.

Note that you can get an exact measurement of the time estimate accuracy for automated acquisition by observing the "percent error" display at the end of the automation, *before* you click "OK" as seen here in this screen shot of the Automate! window:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/eugeg2.jpg)

I would be very interested to get feedback from all users (especially JEOL instrument users) on how accurate the time estimate is for different acquisition types.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (absorbed current)
Post by: Probeman on May 12, 2015, 11:27:14 am
Now that we can measure absorbed current to arbitrary precision (by averaging many A to D conversions in PFE), I was curious to see if we can measure channeling effects in various materials.  So we've all seen how different orientations of Zn metal grains in a polished sample can show variations of BSE as seen here (not all measurements shown on image)...

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/dq0tux.jpg)

Well maybe we can detect that in the absorbed current measurements as well.  This is the same image with a plot of absorbed current for the smaller traverse using 20 A-D averages per point:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/5kpzid.jpg)

So it seems we can.  I wonder if there is any use for this type of absorbed current measurement?
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on June 09, 2015, 02:37:50 pm
I just wanted to share this.

The new wavescan plotting routines are pretty nice for complicated backgrounds.  Here I've acquired wavescans on multiple standards for a trace zircon run:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/32zlx4w.jpg)

Plotting the Th spectrometer scans, note that I moved the high side off-peak to avoid a secondary peak in UO2:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/1zn36dh.jpg)

Here is a situation for U Ma where I decided to avoid extrapolating across the Ar detector absorption edge and utilized "same-side" off-peaks:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/30rn2jb.jpg)

This new feature really helps to sort out these complex situations.
john

PS The plot/output window for standards and unknowns is now in the Output menu, but please note that the User Specified Format output menu is probably the way to go from now on if you wan to export to a file.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on September 18, 2015, 09:15:46 am
In concert with the new release of v. 11.0.6 which contains additional x-ray lines for acquisition and quantification, here is a list of all x-ray and MAC files and what they are for.

XLINE.DAT        X-ray emission line energies for Ka, Kb, La, Lb, Ma, Mb
XLINE2.DAT       X-ray emission line energies for Ln, Lg, Lv, Ll, Mg, Mz

XFLUR.DAT        X-ray fluorescent yields for Ka, Kb, La, Lb, Ma, Mb
XFLUR2.DAT       X-ray fluorescent yields for Ln, Lg, Lv, Ll, Mg, Mz

XEDGE.DAT        X-ray shell edge energies for all K, L and M edges

FFAST.DAT        MAC table for all emitter/absorber binaries for Ka, Kb, La, Lb, Ma, Mb
FFAST2.DAT       MAC table for all emitter/absorber binaries for Ln, Lg, Lv, Ll, Mg, Mz

Note also these additional files that are now distributed:

XLINE.TXT        All zeros text file for updating x-ray emission energy file XLINE.DAT for Ka, Kb, La, Lb, Ma, Mb (see CalcZAF.exe)
XLINE2.TXT       All zeros text file for updating x-ray emission energy file XLINE2.DAT for Ln, Lg, Lv, Ll, Mg, Mz (see CalcZAF.exe)

XFLUR.TXT        All zeros text file for updating x-ray fluorescent yield file XFLUR.DAT for Ka, Kb, La, Lb, Ma, Mb (see CalcZAF.exe)
XFLUR2.TXT       All zeros text file for updating x-ray fluorescent yield file XFLUR2.DAT for Ln, Lg, Lv, Ll, Mg, Mz (see CalcZAF.exe)

XEDGE.TXT        All zeros text file for updating x-ray shell edge energies file XEDGE.DAT for K, L-I, L-II, L-III, M-I, M-II, M-III, M-IV, M-V (see CalcZAF.exe)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on September 21, 2015, 08:49:03 am
Latest version of PFE v. 11.06 supports these additional x-ray lines in all acquisition and quant:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i62.tinypic.com/rj4b3l.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (KLM Markers)
Post by: John Donovan on October 25, 2015, 09:53:40 am
Gareth Seward has implemented new graphics for our EDS spectrum display along with some cool new KLM markers.

The new KLM markers are "dynamic" in the sense that the x-ray line text isn't loaded unless the marker height is more than 10% of the display height.  For example, here is a MgO spectrum with the KLM markers for Mg:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i61.tinypic.com/17pmao.jpg)

Note that only the highest KLM markers are labeled with the x-ray line text. And here is the same plot zoomed in a little more:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/jugxfa.jpg)

I think the new markers are much better looking and we don't get all that KLM "hash" at the bottom of the screen as seen here in these plots of NIST K-411 mineral glass:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i57.tinypic.com/14kfk2q.jpg)

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/34zyrl4.jpg)

The next idea is to add an "absorption correction" to the KLM markers to reflect the predicted intensities!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 05, 2015, 11:35:12 am
I just added the ability to automatically run an final set of standards from the Probe for EPMA Automate! window after the Probe Image automated map acquisitions all complete, as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i67.tinypic.com/4ewps.jpg)

So with the latest version of PFE once can now fire off and run the following automation actions with a single mouse click:

1. Confirm standard, unknown and/or wavescan positions

2. Acquire Standard, unknown and/or wavescan samples

3. Re-run the standards again for the standard intensity drift correction of the point analyses

4. Run Probe Image for automated x-ray mapping

5. Re-run the standards again  for the standard intensity drift correction of the x-ray maps

Pretty cool if I do say so myself!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 15, 2015, 09:16:18 am
I just added the ability to automatically run an final set of standards from the Probe for EPMA Automate! window after the Probe Image automated map acquisitions all complete, as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i67.tinypic.com/4ewps.jpg)

So with the latest version of PFE once can now fire off and run the following automation actions with a single mouse click:

1. Confirm standard, unknown and/or wavescan positions

2. Acquire Standard, unknown and/or wavescan samples

3. Re-run the standards again for the standard intensity drift correction of the point analyses

4. Run Probe Image for automated x-ray mapping

5. Re-run the standards again  for the standard intensity drift correction of the x-ray maps

Pretty cool if I do say so myself!

I want to just say again that if someone with a JEOL instrument could perform a x-ray map stage scan in Probe Image using the following directions I could implement standard intensity drift correction code that would cover the JEOL "anti-cartesian" stage scan method.

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=41.msg3614#msg3614

So here's the test acquisition protocol if you are interested:

1. Create a sample setup in Probe for EPMA with 3 to 5 elements (or more if you want to do a two pass acquisition with more than one element per spectrometer). Karsten has excellent documentation for this here:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=106.0

2. Acquire your primary and MAN standards in PFE. They are automatically saved to your MDB file. Hopefully you turned off the lab air conditioner before you started so the lab temperature change is causing significantly drift in the x-ray intensities over time!

3. Acquire a stage scan using this setup in Probe Image.  Please name the scan sample "JEOL Stage scan...". The x-ray map PrbImg files are automatically saved. 

4. Now acquire the primary and MAN standards in Probe for EPMA *again*, for the drift correction.  Now you can turn your air conditioner back on!

5. Finally zip up your MDB and PrbImg files and send them to me.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 15, 2015, 10:59:23 am
Those with a good eye may have noticed that I've replaced all the old "spin" button controls with Microsoft's new "UpDown" controls as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i65.tinypic.com/30veuwz.jpg)

It might seem like a small thing, but the new control has a much better "click feel" than the old control, particularly when connected to the instrument and the driver is being accessed...
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 02, 2015, 08:00:28 am
The latest v. 11.x of Probe for EPMA has many new and improved features (the current version is 11.1.5).  If you already have v. 11.x, simply use the PFE Help | Update Probe for EPMA menu to get updated.

If you have v. 10.x (or earlier) of PFE you will have to download both the latest CalcZAF.msi and ProbeForEPMA.msi installers (contact us if you need any help with the process) and perform the upgrade manually.  Please refer to this post for more detailed instructions:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=40.msg138#msg138
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 06, 2015, 04:58:30 pm
New scan graphics in the peaking/PHA scan graphics window starting in v. 11.1.6:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i64.tinypic.com/2v0zplk.jpg)

This should fix the problems reported with Windows 8 and "locked down" IT versions of Windows 7.  And I think it looks very nice too.   :)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (actinide and REE binaries)
Post by: Probeman on December 07, 2015, 12:31:12 pm
Many new Penepma Mont-Carlo binaries for fas alpha factor matrix corrections have been added to the current matrix.mdb k-ratio database, including 32 new actinide binaries and 11 new REE binaries...

The complete list of binaries now available is available here:

http://www.probesoftware.com/download/Calculated%20Matrix%20Binaries.txt
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on December 08, 2015, 01:52:48 pm
Here's a small but cute feature requested by the students in this term's EPMA class taught by Julie Chouinard:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i68.tinypic.com/28cf67n.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Malcolm Roberts on December 08, 2015, 10:52:00 pm
Hi John
on Automate! there is a little box that states "use filament standby afterwards". I am sure it used to say something about closing the FEG? Probewin.ini states that the standby mode is not available for FEG, however closing the gun valve would be good as, in the case of the 8530F, the manufacturer recommend a standby state of 10kv and that valve closed. Anyway this might be done?
Cheers,
malc.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 08, 2015, 11:31:46 pm
Hi John
on Automate! there is a little box that states "use filament standby afterwards". I am sure it used to say something about closing the FEG? Probewin.ini states that the standby mode is not available for FEG, however closing the gun valve would be good as, in the case of the 8530F, the manufacturer recommend a standby state of 10kv and that valve closed. Anyway this might be done?
Cheers,
malc.

Hi Malcolm,
The lowering of the keV after the automation finishes is possible- see the user reference manual regarding the FilamentStandbyType keyword in the Probewin.ini file.

As for the closing of the gun valve, Philippe Pinard has asked about that as well, so I've asked JEOL about adding that call to their API, but so far they have said it is "not possible".

You JEOL 8530 users might want to ask them again...
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Malcolm Roberts on December 08, 2015, 11:39:18 pm
Hi John
I'll get the word out at this end. If the instrument is supposed to stand by in a certain config, then it should be possible for them to fix this.
Cheers,
malc.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 11, 2015, 08:10:34 am
New plot graphics for std/unkns and digitized polygon areas:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i63.tinypic.com/28b64w2.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 11, 2015, 11:15:27 am
Log plot works nice too:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i65.tinypic.com/4u9c0i.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 17, 2015, 07:35:20 am
This is a small but useful (I think) feature:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i67.tinypic.com/33u5vmf.jpg)

Basically, you can now set the number of points to skip when displaying TDI trend curves.  For example, in this TDI plot, with all the data displayed (Nth = 1), the plot is rather dense:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i63.tinypic.com/30nb41w.jpg)

But if I set the value to 3, it plots the TDI trend only every 3rd  point:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i67.tinypic.com/24xpb7l.jpg)

Not such a big deal, but later when I implement a TDI correction for x-ray maps, this will be very helpful when plotting TDI trend curves for thousands of pixels!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA (CL spectrum acquisition)
Post by: John Donovan on December 21, 2015, 03:57:00 pm
All,
I am very pleased to announce that Probe for EPMA can now acquire CL spectra for point analyses automatically (along with your WDS intensities and EDS spectrum data).  Right now we are only interfacing to an Ocean Optics spectrometer (I'm using the USB4000 unit right now), but other vendors could be supported also.

Here is an example of a CL spectrum and the corresponding dark spectrum:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i68.tinypic.com/2ry1rsx.jpg)

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i67.tinypic.com/nflb94.jpg)

I picked the Ocean Optics spectrometer hardware to start with because it's not too expensive and if you already have the CSIRO xCLent system on your EPMA instrument, the Ocean Optics spectrometer is already there, connected to the computer and already interfaced.

If you are interested in this option, please contact Barbara (@probesoftware.com) and she will send you a quotation for the CL acquisition software interface.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Dan Ruscitto on December 22, 2015, 01:44:46 pm
I do not believe that even the JEOL software can automatically close the V1 valve using their own Serial Acquisition software! I think this is only done manually using the 'OFF' button in the PC-SEM software.
-Dan
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 22, 2015, 01:59:31 pm
I do not believe that even the JEOL software can automatically close the V1 valve using their own Serial Acquisition software! I think this is only done manually using the 'OFF' button in the PC-SEM software.
-Dan

Hi Dan,
That is interesting, but in any case, I've asked JEOL Japan to provide an API call for controlling this valve for over a year now.

But feel free to bother your local JEOL people about this.  They respond better to their customers than to me.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 23, 2015, 09:07:02 pm
New wavescan graphics in the Probe for EPMA Plot! window:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i63.tinypic.com/2h4dtw7.jpg)

Please let me know what you think...
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 24, 2015, 09:45:54 am
It may be a small thing but I think it helps new users:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i64.tinypic.com/t5sm0z.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 10, 2016, 02:27:22 pm
The latest version of PFE (v. 11.2.5) can display KLM markers and absorption edges in the MultiPoint Background dialog for multi-point bgds and "shared" bgds:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i63.tinypic.com/2chpev5.jpg)

I can't remember who asked for this, but it's a great idea!  Thanks.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 11, 2016, 06:29:17 pm
Here are some screen shots (attached below) showing the new KLM markers for spectro, angstrom and keV plots.

It all seems to work really nice now.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 14, 2016, 11:02:38 am
Improved KLM marker plotting in KeV space for user specified elements:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i67.tinypic.com/24odqvc.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Malcolm Roberts on January 19, 2016, 04:50:02 pm
Hi John
The new graphics look great - much smoother. Only suggestion I have is to keep the font consistent. The times new romanoid headings look strange against the arial of the the axes. Looking at it makes my teeth itch........ :D
Cheers
Malc.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 21, 2016, 03:28:02 pm
The latest version of Probe for EPMA now displays the relative percent fit deviation in the multi-point background dialog as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i63.tinypic.com/2lbch1x.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 23, 2016, 11:57:43 am
New Pro Essentials graphics for MAN plotting.

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i63.tinypic.com/8voydt.jpg)

Note that the data labels now auto arrange to avoid overlapping.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 24, 2016, 03:47:19 pm
New integrated intensity plot dialog graphics:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i64.tinypic.com/wlacqx.jpg)

Note the new off-peak background intensity plotting method (small red circles)...
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 25, 2016, 08:36:48 pm
New Peaking/PHA scan dialog graphics:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i65.tinypic.com/jtkzf7.jpg)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on February 15, 2016, 07:02:52 pm
The MPB display dialog graph is now wider for improved visibility:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/395_15_02_16_7_01_42.png)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on March 27, 2016, 04:03:52 pm
Here is an example of digitizing an irregular polygon based on an image template for quant analysis in Probe for EPMA:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_27_03_16_4_01_58.png)

These points can then be automatically acquired using stage movement or beam deflection.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 31, 2016, 04:31:32 pm
This light optics brightness control is a fairly minor addition to the StageMap window, but it could be useful (especially for 8900/8200/8500 instruments when the UNIX box is down):

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_31_05_16_4_29_31.png)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on June 08, 2016, 01:37:52 pm
Some people expressed their strong feelings at the TC 2016 meeting, on adding an additional Start Peaking button in the Peaking Options dialog:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_08_06_16_1_35_57.png)

Good thing I'm so easy and nice!    :D
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on July 26, 2016, 08:34:46 pm
This is a crop of an x-ray map from my paper coming out next month in Amer. Min. that I think makes a good case for the MAN method, to improve sensitivity, in less time, while maintaining accuracy, for trace element characterization in many materials:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/395_26_07_16_8_44_47.png)

The image titles indicate 3 sec for on-peak plus 3 sec (for off-peak acquisition) per pixel, while the MAN corrected acquisition was only 3 sec per on-peak pixel!

Which means that the off-peak map took 26 hours to acquire, while the MAN background corrected map took 13 hours to acquire, and the MAN x-ray is the more sensitive x-ray map...
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 03, 2016, 03:11:30 pm
I've improved the integrated intensity scan display and background fitting for quantification, as shown in the screen shots attached below (you must be logged in to see attachments!).
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Karsten Goemann on August 04, 2016, 07:53:39 pm
Hi John,

We did a whole bunch of trace sulphur on 4 (L)PETs by integrated intensities and the results look good.

Your solution with being able to select the background ranges on both sides of the peak in the integrated intensities window is VERY NICE. It looks like this is a global setting that applies to all integrated intensities samples (which is fine)? We didn't see individual sample settings for this e.g. in the Elements/Cations window.

The function to delete single data values also works as intended. With the latest run we still had sporadic high first values with the 2000ms scan delay setting. We'll use this a bit more and then decide if we make the delay longer or just delete a data value every now and then.

Thanks for your work on this. It's definitely much more powerful now. We'll be using this a lot, also for things like oxygen in oxide minerals etc.

Cheers,
Karsten
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 04, 2016, 10:19:54 pm
Your solution with being able to select the background ranges on both sides of the peak in the integrated intensities window is VERY NICE. It looks like this is a global setting that applies to all integrated intensities samples (which is fine)? We didn't see individual sample settings for this e.g. in the Elements/Cations window.

Hi Karsten,
That is correct. These new integrated intensity background fit parameters are globals that are saved to each MDB file.

Making the integrated background fit type/number of points specifiable on an element/sample basis is certainly possible, but it would be extra work and so only worth doing if it is necessary.

Thanks for testing this new capability and glad you think it will be useful.  I tend towards using the APF correction method for peak shape/shift issues, but I agree that a direct integrated measurement is generally best, though certainly more time consuming.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 26, 2016, 08:03:20 am
I added a new feature that I've been wanting to do for some time and finally got around to it. Now one can select which sample types the auto-focus methods should be applied to as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_26_08_16_7_52_29.png)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Anette von der Handt on August 29, 2016, 04:32:29 pm
Hi John,

This is a very timely additional feature and relevant to my constantly drifting stage. So, if I select "new sample" it will update the other points in the unknown accordingly? Awesome.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 29, 2016, 05:06:52 pm
Hi John,

This is a very timely additional feature and relevant to my constantly drifting stage. So, if I select "new sample" it will update the other points in the unknown accordingly? Awesome.

Absolutely.

The "New Sample",  "Every Point", Digitized" and "Interval" autofocus options were already there, I just added the options for applying them to different sample types (Std, Unk and Wavscans).
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Anette von der Handt on August 30, 2016, 09:55:40 am
Yes, i just never realized it would do an update too (and my autofocus is a little temperamental, so I used it sparingly so far).

If I select the interval option will it "update? each time too?

Thanks!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 30, 2016, 10:18:32 am
Yes, i just never realized it would do an update too (and my autofocus is a little temperamental, so I used it sparingly so far).

If I select the interval option will it "update? each time too?

Thanks!

Yes. It will update every "Interval" points. The update will be applied to the current point and all subsequent points in that position sample.

So for example, if you have 20 points digitized and the auto focus interval is 3, then the software will run the auto focus every 3 positions (starting with the first point of the position sample), and apply that Z offset to the current and subsequent points in the current position sample.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on September 06, 2016, 06:51:06 pm
This is a set of features that weren't working quite perfectly together (the boys in Tasmania have been busy!), but now these features are working together very nicely!  Here's the deal according to Sandrin:

Quote
We first analyse the major and minor elements with a fairly gentle beam current and TDI and then we hit it harder with integrated intensity and 4 spectrometers on one element (e.g., normally either S or Cl) to get good detection limits. That is what we then want to combine [in the Analyze! window].

So I fixed some new code, added an error message and added a checkbox so one can specify that the program load the integrated intensity sample first (don't ask why!) and then add in the TDI sample for a complete combined analysis under very different acquisition modes.

I'm not sure what this sample is (a hydrated glass?), but here is an example of what is described above:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_06_09_16_6_31_24.png)

Note that not only are all four spectrometers scanning the sulfur peak, but PFE is also aggregating these integrated intensities into a single channel for the best sensitivity.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Sandrin Feig on September 06, 2016, 07:44:54 pm
Thank you for implementing this John. Well done! This will make the processing of the analyses much easier for us.

The analyses shown in the example are indeed from an hydrated glass. They are melt inclusions trapped in Olivine.

Cheers
Sandrin
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on October 03, 2016, 04:11:04 pm
The latest version of Probe for EPMA now displays the initial absorbed current when measuring absorbed current with the TDI (time dependent intensity) mode as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/395_03_10_16_2_42_56.png)

Thanks to Gareth Seward who suggested it.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on October 29, 2016, 05:56:23 pm
The latest version of PFE 11.6.7 will pop up a small dialog and ask you for a description of your instrument and facility as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_29_10_16_5_54_25.png)

Simply enter a short description of your instrument and facility in the text field and you will not be bothered again. This field will be utilized in Sandrin Feig's EPMA Method Development Tool described here when importing wavescans from PFE:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=743.msg5221#msg5221
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 10, 2016, 10:36:34 am
I added a new "type" for filament standby based on a request by Philipp Poeml.  Here are the new keywords in the Probewin.ini file in the [hardware] section:

      FilamentStandbyType=3
      FilamentStandbyExternalScript="C:\UserData\shutdown.bat"

Basically if the FilamentStandbyType is set to "3" and the FilamentStandbyExternalScript keyword points to a valid executable (*.exe, *.bat, etc.), and the Use Filament Standby checkbox is checked in the Automate! window, then Probe for EPMA will launch that app when the automation finishes.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 22, 2016, 05:21:30 pm
The latest version of Probe for EPMA can now scan and load column conditions for the 8x30 series of JEOL instruments. The following parameters are saved and reloaded with the exception of the save/load filament current for warming up the 8230 tungsten filaments (we are awaiting some additional information from JEOL before this is fully implemented).

"Condenser Coarse "         ,              33
"Condenser Fine   "         ,              269
"Magnification    "         ,              60000
"High Voltage     "         ,              15
"Probe Current    "         ,              4.001E-08
"Probe Diameter   "         ,              0
"Objective Lens   "         ,              10.92727
"Astigmation X    "         ,             -286
"Astigmation Y    "         ,             -150
"Image Shift X    "         ,             -193
"Image Shift Y    "         ,             -193
"Probe Scan       "         ,              1
"Sampling Mode    "         ,              0
"Scan Rotation    "         ,              345
"Filament Current "         ,              0
"Beam Position X  "         ,              0
"Beam Position Y  "         ,              0
"Probe Curr. Mode "         ,              1
"Column Mode      "         ,              1
"Image Channel    "         ,              1

I would like to thank Glenn Poirier, Henny Cathey and Ben Buse for their help and assistance with this.

Edit by John: I should mention that in order to utilize this new feature you will need to update to the latest JEOL driver.

Please contact Probe Software, or one of our microprobe specialists listed here, for an updated driver.

http://probesoftware.com/Support.html
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 20, 2016, 01:24:14 pm
In a related change (PCC files), I've modified the text and tool tip help for the PCC file option as seen here in the Analytical Conditions dialog:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_20_12_16_1_21_15.png)

In addition, when the user now browses to a PCC file, the software automatically selects the Use Probe Column Condition option.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 21, 2016, 11:30:16 am
Hi Anette,
I added output of keV values to the default wavescan sample output format (see Output menu).   The keV values are "calibrated" to the on-peak position of each element/spectrometer/crystal combination.

See PFE Help file for details.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on December 30, 2016, 09:09:28 am
Strictly speaking this is not a new feature, but it might be new to some of you...

I was recently performing some measurements of a complex REE silicate with significant fluorine and managed to confuse myself on a subtle point regarding halogens and oxygen stoichiometry.  So I thought I would share my learning experience...  Let's start with standards.  For reference please check appendix 1 "Calculation of a ... Hornblende Analysis" in "Rock Forming Minerals" by Deer, Howie and Zussman.

If you have a standard with significant replacement of stoichiometric oxygen with halogens, there are at least two ways to enter the compositional data in the Standard.exe app. For example, one can enter the composition as simple oxides plus the halogen, in which case one will see something like this in the standard composition dialog for a typical fluor-phlogopite:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/395_30_12_16_8_28_38.png)

The log window output is seen here:

St  282 Fluor-phlogopite (synthetic)
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Density =  2.879

Grown by S. Wones, Univ of Tenn
Oxide and Elemental Composition

Average Total Oxygen:       41.775     Average Total Weight%:  103.789
Average Calculated Oxygen:  41.778     Average Atomic Number:   11.202
Average Excess Oxygen:       -.003     Average Atomic Weight:   20.822
Oxygen Equiv. from Halogen:  3.798

ELEM:     SiO2     MgO   Al2O3     K2O       F       O
XRAY:      ka      ka      ka      ka      ka      ka
OXWT:   42.791  28.700  12.100  11.180   9.020   -.003
ELWT:   20.002  17.307   6.404   9.281   9.020  41.775
KFAC:    .1502   .1224   .0432   .0818   .0249   .1837
ZCOR:   1.3317  1.4138  1.4820  1.1342  3.6217  2.2746
AT% :   14.287  14.285   4.761   4.762   9.525  52.379
24 O:    6.546   6.545   2.182   2.182   4.364  24.000

Note that because the halogen-oxygen equivalence was *not* accounted for we have a high total in this standard 282. Alternatively we can enter the standard composition in elemental weight percents, in which case we will see something like this:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/395_30_12_16_8_28_54.png)

and this corresponding log window output:

St  284 Fluor-phlogopite (halogen corrected)
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Density =  2.879

Grown by S. Wones, Univ of Tenn
(applied F=O equivalence)
Oxide and Elemental Composition

Average Total Oxygen:       37.980     Average Total Weight%:   99.994
Average Calculated Oxygen:  41.778     Average Atomic Number:   11.324
Average Excess Oxygen:      -3.798     Average Atomic Weight:   21.063
Oxygen Equiv. from Halogen:  3.798

ELEM:     SiO2     MgO   Al2O3     K2O       F       O
XRAY:      ka      ka      ka      ka      ka      ka
OXWT:   42.791  28.700  12.100  11.180   9.020  -3.798
ELWT:   20.002  17.307   6.404   9.281   9.020  37.980
KFAC:    .1500   .1235   .0432   .0818   .0256   .1630
ZCOR:   1.3338  1.4016  1.4818  1.1346  3.5255  2.3298
AT% :   15.001  14.999   4.999   5.000  10.001  50.000
24 O:    7.200   7.200   2.400   2.400   4.800  24.000


Note that in this second case (standard 284), we have a good total, but that is because we entered a total oxygen value which reflects the replacement of oxygen by halogen in this mineral.

OK, now lets perform an analysis of these standards in Probe for EPMA, starting with the first standard, number 282, where we did *not* account for the replacement of oxygen by halogen (this is similar to how we might expect an unknown mineral to behave, since we wouldn't know in advance that there was replacement of stochiometric oxygen by halogen). So here is the analysis, of our 282 fluor-phlogopite with oxygen entered stoichiometrically:

St  282 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (synthetic)
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Beam Current = 30.0  Beam Size =    0

Average Total Oxygen:       41.478     Average Total Weight%:  103.307
Average Calculated Oxygen:  41.481     Average Atomic Number:   11.203
Average Excess Oxygen:       -.003     Average Atomic Weight:   20.825
Oxygen Equiv. from Halogen:  3.830  Halogen Corrected Oxygen:   37.648
Average ZAF Iteration:        4.00     Average Quant Iterate:     2.00

Oxygen Calculated by Cation Stoichiometry and Included in the Matrix Correction
Oxygen Equivalent from Halogens (F/Cl/Br/I), Not Subtracted in the Matrix Correction

St  282 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (synthetic), Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    SPEC    SPEC    SPEC    CALC
BGDS:      LIN     LIN
TIME:    30.00   40.00     ---     ---     ---     ---
BEAM:    29.97   29.97     ---     ---     ---     ---

ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O   SUM 
     4  19.741   9.095  17.307   6.404   9.281  41.478 103.307

AVER:   19.741   9.095  17.307   6.404   9.281  41.478 103.307
SDEV:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
SERR:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
%RSD:      .00     .00     .00     .00     .00     .00

PUBL:   20.002   9.020  17.307   6.404   9.281  41.775 103.789
%VAR:    -1.30     .83     .00     .00     .00    -.71
DIFF:    -.261    .075    .000    .000    .000   -.297
STDS:      160     284     ---     ---     ---     ---

STKF:    .1621   .0256     ---     ---     ---     ---
STCT:   1738.1   106.6     ---     ---     ---     ---

UNKF:    .1481   .0251     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNCT:   1588.2   104.8     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNBG:      3.4     9.4     ---     ---     ---     ---

ZCOR:   1.3328  3.6164     ---     ---     ---     ---
KRAW:    .9138   .9830     ---     ---     ---     ---
PKBG:   465.06   12.11     ---     ---     ---     ---


Note that as expected we have a high compositional total, because we have more oxygen specified in the standard than is actually present (due to replacement of some oxygen by fluorine).  So what can we do about this? Well, there's a cute feature in PFE under the Analytical | Analysis Options menu as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/395_30_12_16_8_45_02.png)

When we turn this flag on, the software will automatically calculate the oxygen equivalence of any halogens present *and* subtract this out *during* the matrix correction iteration (with the flag off the software simply reports the oxygen equivalence).

Interestingly this turns out to be especially important for fluorine due to the large absorption of fluorine Ka by oxygen. In fact if this oxygen equivalence subtraction is *not* performed during the matrix correction, one will see a 15% relative *over-estimation" of the fluorine concentration in the analysis!  (I really should write this up as a short paper with someone, so do let me know if you are interested in this idea.)

And therefore, when the halogen-oxygen equivalence correction is applied we get a normal looking analysis as seen here:

St  282 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (synthetic)
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Beam Current = 30.0  Beam Size =    0

Average Total Oxygen:       37.776     Average Total Weight%:   99.411
Average Calculated Oxygen:  37.778     Average Atomic Number:   11.328
Average Excess Oxygen:       -.003     Average Atomic Weight:   21.067
Oxygen Equiv. from Halogen:  3.736  Halogen Corrected Oxygen:   37.776
Average ZAF Iteration:        4.00     Average Quant Iterate:     2.00

Oxygen Calculated by Cation Stoichiometry and Included in the Matrix Correction
Oxygen Equivalent from Halogens (F/Cl/Br/I), Subtracted in the Matrix Correction

St  282 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (synthetic), Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    SPEC    SPEC    SPEC    CALC
BGDS:      LIN     LIN
TIME:    30.00   40.00     ---     ---     ---     ---
BEAM:    29.97   29.97     ---     ---     ---     ---

ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O   SUM 
     4  19.771   8.873  17.307   6.404   9.281  37.776  99.411

AVER:   19.771   8.873  17.307   6.404   9.281  37.776  99.411
SDEV:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
SERR:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
%RSD:      .00     .00     .00     .00     .00     .00

PUBL:   20.002   9.020  17.307   6.404   9.281  41.775 103.789
%VAR:    -1.15   -1.63     .00     .00     .00   -9.57
DIFF:    -.231   -.147    .000    .000    .000  -3.999
STDS:      160     284     ---     ---     ---     ---

STKF:    .1621   .0256     ---     ---     ---     ---
STCT:   1738.1   106.6     ---     ---     ---     ---

UNKF:    .1481   .0251     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNCT:   1588.2   104.8     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNBG:      3.4     9.4     ---     ---     ---     ---

ZCOR:   1.3348  3.5280     ---     ---     ---     ---
KRAW:    .9138   .9830     ---     ---     ---     ---
PKBG:   465.06   12.11     ---     ---     ---     ---


What about of standard 282 where we entered the correct amount of oxygen in the Standard.exe app?  Well, in this case we do *not* want to perform this oxygen-halogen equivalence correction, because then we would be performing a *double* correction as seen here:

St  284 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (halogen corrected)
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Beam Current = 30.0  Beam Size =    0

Average Total Oxygen:       34.317     Average Total Weight%:   96.125
Average Calculated Oxygen:  38.115     Average Atomic Number:   11.457
Average Excess Oxygen:      -3.798     Average Atomic Weight:   21.327
Oxygen Equiv. from Halogen:  3.699  Halogen Corrected Oxygen:   34.317
Average ZAF Iteration:        4.00     Average Quant Iterate:     2.00

Oxygen Calculated by Cation Stoichiometry and Included in the Matrix Correction
Oxygen Equivalent from Halogens (F/Cl/Br/I), Subtracted in the Matrix Correction

St  284 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (halogen corrected), Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    SPEC    SPEC    SPEC    CALC
BGDS:      LIN     LIN
TIME:    30.00   40.00     ---     ---     ---     ---
BEAM:    29.96   29.96     ---     ---     ---     ---

ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O   SUM 
     2  20.033   8.783  17.307   6.404   9.281  34.317  96.125

AVER:   20.033   8.783  17.307   6.404   9.281  34.317  96.125
SDEV:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
SERR:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
%RSD:      .00     .00     .00     .00     .00     .00

PUBL:   20.002   9.020  17.307   6.404   9.281  37.980  99.994
%VAR:    (.16) (-2.63)     .00     .00     .00   -9.64
DIFF:    (.03)  (-.24)    .000    .000    .000  -3.663
STDS:      284     284     ---     ---     ---     ---

STKF:    .1500   .0256     ---     ---     ---     ---
STCT:   1548.2   106.6     ---     ---     ---     ---

UNKF:    .1500   .0256     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNCT:   1548.2   106.6     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNBG:      4.2     9.0     ---     ---     ---     ---

ZCOR:   1.3359  3.4329     ---     ---     ---     ---
KRAW:   1.0000  1.0000     ---     ---     ---     ---
PKBG:   369.08   12.83     ---     ---     ---     ---


Therefore, in the case of a standard (e.g., 284), which is *already* corrected for this oxygen-halogen equivalence in the standard database, we would *not* want to perform this correction.  So we turn off the correction as seen here:

St  284 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (halogen corrected)
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Beam Current = 30.0  Beam Size =    0

Average Total Oxygen:       37.982     Average Total Weight%:   99.998
Average Calculated Oxygen:  41.780     Average Atomic Number:   11.324
Average Excess Oxygen:      -3.798     Average Atomic Weight:   21.063
Oxygen Equiv. from Halogen:  3.798  Halogen Corrected Oxygen:   34.184
Average ZAF Iteration:        3.00     Average Quant Iterate:     2.00

Oxygen Calculated by Cation Stoichiometry and Included in the Matrix Correction
Oxygen Equivalent from Halogens (F/Cl/Br/I), Not Subtracted in the Matrix Correction

St  284 Set   1 Fluor-phlogopite (halogen corrected), Results in Elemental Weight Percents
 
ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O
TYPE:     ANAL    ANAL    SPEC    SPEC    SPEC    CALC
BGDS:      LIN     LIN
TIME:    30.00   40.00     ---     ---     ---     ---
BEAM:    29.96   29.96     ---     ---     ---     ---

ELEM:       Si       F      Mg      Al       K       O   SUM 
     2  20.004   9.020  17.307   6.404   9.281  37.982  99.998

AVER:   20.004   9.020  17.307   6.404   9.281  37.982  99.998
SDEV:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
SERR:     .000    .000    .000    .000    .000    .000
%RSD:      .00     .00     .00     .00     .00     .00

PUBL:   20.002   9.020  17.307   6.404   9.281  37.980  99.994
%VAR:    (.01)   (.00)     .00     .00     .00     .01
DIFF:    (.00)   (.00)    .000    .000    .000    .002
STDS:      284     284     ---     ---     ---     ---

STKF:    .1500   .0256     ---     ---     ---     ---
STCT:   1548.2   106.6     ---     ---     ---     ---

UNKF:    .1500   .0256     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNCT:   1548.2   106.6     ---     ---     ---     ---
UNBG:      4.2     9.0     ---     ---     ---     ---

ZCOR:   1.3339  3.5255     ---     ---     ---     ---
KRAW:   1.0000  1.0000     ---     ---     ---     ---
PKBG:   369.08   12.83     ---     ---     ---     ---


Sorry, that if this is a little confusing, because, well, it is a little confusing!  :D

Next, as soon as I get back in the lab, I will perform a similar experiment on the standards analyzed as unknowns!
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 14, 2017, 12:28:55 pm
Karsten Goemann and I were skyping last week discussing his new microprobe purchase (his lab will one of several that runs Probe for EPMA on both a Cameca and a JEOL instrument), and he mentioned that it would be nice if one could select the sample "basis" for editing multiple selected samples in the Elements/Cations dialog.

I agree this could be useful. Right now the software always loads the last selected sample as the sample basis for the parameters to apply to the other selected samples as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_14_01_17_12_20_59.png)

So I thought about it and modified the code to load any sample which is selected in the Elements/Cations dialog as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_14_01_17_12_21_14.png)

Note that if you select a new sample basis, the software will load that sample overwriting any changes you might have made, so only select the sample basis when you first load the dialog.  I guess I could add a "are you sure?" prompt, but let's see what you all think of this first cut at this feature.
john

Edit by John: this sample basis selection feature also works for the Standard Assignments (and interference, blank, TDI corrections) parameters also.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Karsten Goemann on March 27, 2017, 11:33:58 pm
I've been using this now for some time and it works very well!
Many thanks John for implementing it.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 14, 2017, 05:20:03 pm
We recently added a new "standard filter" feature in Probe for EPMA (and CalcZAF), when selecting standards from the standard database based on a suggestion from a colleague.

To utilize this feature you will need to update CalcZAF or Probe for EPMA and use the Standard | Modify menu in the Standard app to edit the new material type field in the standard database as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_14_05_17_5_06_36.png)

These material types are merely text strings that the user specifies, for example "glass", or "oxide", or "silicate", or "phosphate", etc., etc. 

After one has edited these fields, then when the Add/Remove Standards menu is opened in Probe for EPMA (or CalcZAF), one merely selects the type of standards to display as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_14_05_17_5_07_02.png)

Enjoy and let me know what you all think.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Anette von der Handt on May 15, 2017, 05:31:05 am
Nice! So, I could also just enter "Std Block 1", or other custom groupings. This will make it easier to navigate my large standard database.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 15, 2017, 07:02:59 am
Nice! So, I could also just enter "Std Block 1", or other custom groupings. This will make it easier to navigate my large standard database.

Hi Anette,
You could do that.  But I think reserving this database field for actual "material types" (silicate, oxide, glass, feldspar, etc) would be better.

For your sorting by std block purposes, I will add an additional button to allow users to import standards into the Add/Remove Standards dialog from any POS file.  Coming soon!
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 15, 2017, 09:04:41 pm
Hi Anette,
OK, here is your request:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_15_05_17_9_03_32.png)

john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 19, 2017, 10:23:04 pm
The latest version of PFE (11.9.0) now outputs the standard description field when using the Report button from the Analyze! window (requested by Anette von der Handt) as seen here:

Zircon crystal (synthetic)
Specimen made by Lynn Boatner, ORNL, Solid State Div.
Flux grown, may contain some Mo impurities
ICP-MS by Alan Koenig, Hf 15 PPM, Y ~25 PPM, U 0 PPM, Th 0 PPM

HfSiO4 (Hafnon)
Synthetic material
Flux grown by John Hanchar

Ni2SiO4 (synthetic)
Specimen grown by Dr. M. Ojima, Tokyo Univ.
Flux method (may contain some Mo and Li)

Hafnium metal
From LBL
Zr by EPMA (J. Donovan)

Mg2SiO4 (magnesium olivine) synthetic
Specimen grown by H. Takei
Institute for Solid State Physics, Univ of Tokyo
See Takei, Jour. Crys. Growth, v. 23, 1974

Co2SiO4 (cobalt olivine) synthetic
Specimen grown by H. Takei, Institute for Solid State Physics, Univ of Tokyo
See Takei, Jour. Crys. Growth, v. 23, 1974
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 21, 2017, 02:20:33 pm
To continue with the previous post here is the sort of output one can obtain from the actual "Report" button in the Analyze! window for a typical silicate glass run:

Probe for EPMA Xtreme Edition for Electron Probe Micro Analysis
Database File: C:\UserData\Donovan\Withers\Withers_01-31-2008.MDB
Database File Type: PROBE
DataFile Version Number: 7.4.2
Program Version Number: 11.9.0
Database File User Name: John Donovan
Database File Description: NSL-N6

Database Created: 1/31/2008 10:24:36 AM
Last Updated: 1/31/2008 10:24:36 AM
Last Modified: 5/13/2017 1:33:39 PM
Current Date and Time: 5/21/2017 2:18:19 PM
Nominal Beam: 30 (nA)
Faraday/Absorbed Averages: 1


Correction Method and Mass Absorption Coefficient File:
ZAF or Phi-Rho-Z Calculations
LINEMU   Henke (LBL, 1985) < 10KeV / CITZMU > 10KeV

Current ZAF or Phi-Rho-Z Selection:
Armstrong/Love Scott (default)

Correction Selections:
Phi(pz) Absorption of Armstrong/Packwood-Brown 1981 MAS
Stopping Power of Love-Scott
Backscatter Coefficient of Love-Scott
Backscatter of Love-Scott
Mean Ionization of Berger-Seltzer
Phi(pz) Equation of Love-Scott
Reed/JTA w/ M-Line Correction and JTA Intensity Mod.
Fluorescence by Beta Lines Included

Un   12 Withers-NSL
TakeOff = 40.0  KiloVolt = 15.0  Beam Current = 10.0  Beam Size =   20
(Magnification (analytical) =  20000),        Beam Mode = Analog  Spot
(Magnification (default) =      600, Magnification (imaging) =    600)
Image Shift (X,Y):                                         .00,    .00

Compositional analyses were acquired on an electron microprobe (Cameca SX100 (TCP/IP Socket)) equipped with 5 tunable wavelength dispersive spectrometers.

Operating conditions were 40 degrees takeoff angle, and a beam energy of 15 keV.
The beam current was 10 nA, and the beam diameter was 20 microns.

Elements were acquired using analyzing crystals LLIF for Ti ka, Fe ka, Mn ka, Ca ka, PET for Cl ka, Ba la, K ka, TAP for Na ka, Mg ka, LTAP for F ka, Si ka, Al ka, TAP for Na ka, Mg ka, and PC1 for O ka.

The standards were MgO synthetic for Mg ka, O ka, TiO2 synthetic for Ti ka, MnO synthetic for Mn ka, NBS K-411 mineral glass for Si ka, Ca10(PO4)6Cl2 (halogen corrected) for Cl ka, Nepheline (partial anal.) for Na ka, Al ka, Diopside (Chesterman) for Ca ka, Orthoclase MAD-10 for K ka, Magnetite U.C. #3380 for Fe ka, and BaF2 (barium fluoride) for Ba la, F ka.

MgO synthetic
1. UCB # M3567, 99.8%, EPMA (UCB): Ca ~ 0.2%
2. C. M. Taylor, 99.98%, EPMA (UCB) Ca ~ 0.02%

SiO2 synthetic
Specimen from ESPI, 99.99%, EPMA (UCB): Al2O3 ~ 0.01%
Catalog #K4699M
Atomic Absorption (Chris Lewis):
Al=15 ppm +/- 5
Fe=6 ppm +/- 3
Mn=1.5 ppm +/- 0.3
Na=5 ppm +/- 3
Li= 2.3 ppm +/- 0.2

TiO2 synthetic
Specimen from Mimports, Lafayette, CA
Assumed stoichiometric
EPMA (UCB): Al2O3=0.02 (interference corrected)

Fluor-phlogopite (halogen corrected)
Grown by S. Wones, Univ of Tenn
(applied F=O equivalence)

Ca10(PO4)6Cl2 (halogen corrected)
Specimen from Alan Baumer, Univ of Nice, France
Hydrothermally grown
See Argiolas and Baumer, Can. Min., v. 16, pp 285-290, 1978

Nepheline (partial anal.)
Analysis by ISE Carmichael (Na, K)
Ca = 750 PPM (EPMA by JJD)

Diopside (Chesterman)
Twin Lakes, Fresno Co., CA
From Charles Chesterman (Ca Div. Mines)

Orthoclase MAD-10
Specimen from Chuck Taylor
Fe2O3=2.01% (EPMA by J. Donovan) (as FeO=1.88% + 0.13% O)
K2O=15.49%, Na2O=1.07% (Flame photometry by J. Hampel)
BaO=0.06%, Rb2O=0.03% (EPMA by J. Donovan)
Sr=12 ppm, Rb=600 ppm (Isotope dilution)

Magnetite U.C. #3380
Port Henry, NY
FeO=30.93% (ISE Carmichael)
Fe2O3=68.85%, FeO=30.92% (as FeO=92.73% + 6.90% O)
(Total FeO=92.73%, by EPMA, JJD)

MnO synthetic
Specimen from Michael Wittenauer (Purdue Univ.)
Starting mat'l 99.999%, SM # 317, 'skull melt' process
Mat. Res. Bull. 15, p 571, 1980
(possible intergrowths of Mn3O4 and small inclusions of Mn metal)
EPMA (UCB): SiO2=0.00, FeO=0.00, CaO=0.00, Al2O3=0

NiO synthetic
1. Specimen from Michael Wittenauer (Purdue Univ.)
Starting mat'l 99.999%, Boule WI, Arc Transfer
2. Specimen from G. Czemanske, USGS (Oct 12, 1984)
EPMA (UCB): FeO=0.05%
-----------------------------
All material assumed stoichiometric

NBS K-412 mineral glass
SRM 470, NIST
C.M. Taylor (Photometry?) FeO 2.77, Fe2O3 8.15
Total as FeO 10.10, Excess O 0.815
Na = 430 PPM (EPMA by JJD)

NBS K-411 mineral glass
SRM 470, NIST
C.M. Taylor (Photometry?) FeO 4.39, Fe2O3 11.23
Total as FeO 14.49, Excess O 1.12

BIR-1G Glass
USGS
see Meeker, et. al. "A Basalt Glass Standard for Multiple Microanalytical Techniques"

BaF2 (barium fluoride)
Single crystal, fluorescent

The counting time was 10 seconds for Cl ka, Ti ka, Mn ka, 20 seconds for K ka, Ba la, Ca ka, Si ka, Al ka, 40 seconds for F ka, Fe ka, 60 seconds for Na ka, Mg ka, and 120 seconds for O ka.

The intensity data was corrected for Time Dependent Intensity (TDI) loss (or gain) using a self calibrated correction for Na ka, K ka, Ti ka, Si ka, O ka.

The off peak counting time was 10 seconds for Cl ka, Mn ka, Ti ka, and 20 seconds for Ba la, F ka, K ka, O ka.

Off Peak correction method was Linear for Mn ka, Cl ka, Ba la, F ka, K ka, Low Only for Ti ka, and Exponential for O ka.

The MAN background intensity data was calibrated and continuum absorption corrected for Na ka, Fe ka, Ca ka, Si ka, Al ka, Mg ka.

See J.J. Donovan and T.N. Tingle, An Improved Mean Atomic Number Correction for  Quantitative Microanalysis in Journal of Microscopy, v. 2, 1, p. 1-7, 1996
Donovan, Singer and Armstrong, A New EPMA Method for Fast Trace Element Analysis in Simple Matrices, American Mineralogist, v101, p1839-1853, (2016)

Unknown and standard intensities were corrected for deadtime. Standard intensities were corrected for standard drift over time.

Interference corrections were applied to Ba for interference by Ti, and to Ti for interference by Ba.

See J.J. Donovan, D.A. Snyder and M.L. Rivers, An Improved Interference Correction for Trace Element Analysis in Microbeam Analysis, 2: 23-28, 1993

Empirical Mass Absorption Coefficients were utilized to correct x-ray intensities for matrix corrections.

See Bastin, G.F. and Heijligers, H.J.M (1991) Quantitative electron probe microanalysis of ultra-light elements (boron - oxygen), in Electron Probe Quantitation, ed K.F.J. Heinrich and D.E. Newbury, Plenum Press, NY, 145-161

Also Bastin, G.F. and Heijligers, H.J.M. (1992) Present and future of light element analysis with electron beam instruments, Microbeam Analysis, 1, 61-73.

Current Mass Absorption Coefficients From:
LINEMU   Henke (LBL, 1985) < 10KeV / CITZMU > 10KeV

  Z-LINE   X-RAY Z-ABSOR     MAC
      Na      ka      Na  5.6089e+02
      Na      ka      K   3.8110e+03
      Na      ka      Cl  2.5391e+03
      Na      ka      Ba  7.6213e+03
      Na      ka      F   5.1229e+03
      Na      ka      Ti  5.2439e+03
      Na      ka      Fe  8.1986e+03
      Na      ka      Mn  7.2518e+03
      Na      ka      Ca  4.3573e+03
      Na      ka      Si  1.4049e+03
      Na      ka      Al  1.0667e+03
      Na      ka      Mg  8.1441e+02
      Na      ka      O   4.1515e+03
      Na      ka      H   5.9317e+00
      K       ka      Na  3.7714e+02
      K       ka      K   1.7109e+02
      K       ka      Cl  1.1539e+03
      K       ka      Ba  7.2049e+02
      K       ka      F   2.1534e+02
      K       ka      Ti  2.4971e+02
      K       ka      Fe  4.1167e+02
      K       ka      Mn  3.5594e+02
      K       ka      Ca  1.9889e+02
      K       ka      Si  7.4506e+02
      K       ka      Al  5.9083e+02
      K       ka      Mg  5.0887e+02
      K       ka      O   1.6416e+02
      K       ka      H   1.1806e-01
      Cl      ka      Na  7.3634e+02
      Cl      ka      K   3.2806e+02
      Cl      ka      Cl  2.1561e+02
      Cl      ka      Ba  1.2824e+03
      Cl      ka      F   4.2282e+02
      Cl      ka      Ti  4.7326e+02
      Cl      ka      Fe  7.8172e+02
      Cl      ka      Mn  6.7972e+02
      Cl      ka      Ca  3.7594e+02
      Cl      ka      Si  1.4010e+03
      Cl      ka      Al  1.1255e+03
      Cl      ka      Mg  9.8203e+02
      Cl      ka      O   3.2567e+02
      Cl      ka      H   2.6576e-01
      Ba      la      Na  1.6022e+02
      Ba      la      K   7.2502e+02
      Ba      la      Cl  5.2953e+02
      Ba      la      Ba  3.3617e+02
      Ba      la      F   9.0427e+01
      Ba      la      Ti  1.1151e+02
      Ba      la      Fe  1.8314e+02
      Ba      la      Mn  1.5795e+02
      Ba      la      Ca  8.3453e+02
      Ba      la      Si  3.2826e+02
      Ba      la      Al  2.5758e+02
      Ba      la      Mg  2.1898e+02
      Ba      la      O   6.7822e+01
      Ba      la      H   4.2840e-02
      F       ka      Na  1.8327e+03
      F       ka      K   1.0658e+04
      F       ka      Cl  7.5904e+03
      F       ka      Ba  3.1554e+03
      F       ka      F   9.2209e+02
      F       ka      Ti  1.4588e+04
      F       ka      Fe  2.3374e+03
      F       ka      Mn  1.6117e+04
      F       ka      Ca  1.2415e+04
      F       ka      Si  4.2952e+03
      F       ka      Al  3.4208e+03
      F       ka      Mg  2.6263e+03
      F       ka      O   1.2440e+04
      F       ka      H   2.4805e+01
      Ti      ka      Na  1.5590e+02
      Ti      ka      K   7.0770e+02
      Ti      ka      Cl  5.1645e+02
      Ti      ka      Ba  3.2787e+02
      Ti      ka      F   8.7938e+01
      Ti      ka      Ti  1.0869e+02
      Ti      ka      Fe  1.7855e+02
      Ti      ka      Mn  1.5394e+02
      Ti      ka      Ca  8.1470e+02
      Ti      ka      Si  3.1977e+02
      Ti      ka      Al  2.5083e+02
      Ti      ka      Mg  2.1325e+02
      Ti      ka      O   6.5919e+01
      Ti      ka      H   4.1490e-02
      Fe      ka      Na  5.5397e+01
      Fe      ka      K   2.7665e+02
      Fe      ka      Cl  1.9695e+02
      Fe      ka      Ba  6.1414e+02
      Fe      ka      F   3.0620e+01
      Fe      ka      Ti  3.7689e+02
      Fe      ka      Fe  6.8270e+01
      Fe      ka      Mn  5.9704e+01
      Fe      ka      Ca  3.2161e+02
      Fe      ka      Si  1.1782e+02
      Fe      ka      Al  9.1605e+01
      Fe      ka      Mg  7.6877e+01
      Fe      ka      O   2.2548e+01
      Fe      ka      H   1.2590e-02
      Mn      ka      Na  6.8522e+01
      Mn      ka      K   3.3731e+02
      Mn      ka      Cl  2.4097e+02
      Mn      ka      Ba  6.5921e+02
      Mn      ka      F   3.8047e+01
      Mn      ka      Ti  4.5531e+02
      Mn      ka      Fe  8.3286e+01
      Mn      ka      Mn  7.2508e+01
      Mn      ka      Ca  3.9062e+02
      Mn      ka      Si  1.4510e+02
      Mn      ka      Al  1.1272e+02
      Mn      ka      Mg  9.4808e+01
      Mn      ka      O   2.8131e+01
      Mn      ka      H   1.6010e-02
      Ca      ka      Na  2.7733e+02
      Ca      ka      K   1.1737e+03
      Ca      ka      Cl  8.7515e+02
      Ca      ka      Ba  5.5026e+02
      Ca      ka      F   1.5790e+02
      Ca      ka      Ti  1.8677e+02
      Ca      ka      Fe  3.0742e+02
      Ca      ka      Mn  2.6528e+02
      Ca      ka      Ca  1.4983e+02
      Ca      ka      Si  5.5579e+02
      Ca      ka      Al  4.3892e+02
      Ca      ka      Mg  3.7616e+02
      Ca      ka      O   1.1972e+02
      Ca      ka      H   8.1770e-02
      Si      ka      Na  2.2375e+03
      Si      ka      K   9.7768e+02
      Si      ka      Cl  6.5835e+02
      Si      ka      Ba  3.3056e+03
      Si      ka      F   1.3201e+03
      Si      ka      Ti  1.4132e+03
      Si      ka      Fe  2.3053e+03
      Si      ka      Mn  2.0250e+03
      Si      ka      Ca  1.1465e+03
      Si      ka      Si  3.5048e+02
      Si      ka      Al  3.2132e+03
      Si      ka      Mg  2.9015e+03
      Si      ka      O   1.0337e+03
      Si      ka      H   1.0618e+00
      Al      ka      Na  3.3597e+03
      Al      ka      K   1.4794e+03
      Al      ka      Cl  9.9433e+02
      Al      ka      Ba  4.6512e+03
      Al      ka      F   2.0277e+03
      Al      ka      Ti  2.1374e+03
      Al      ka      Fe  3.4392e+03
      Al      ka      Mn  3.0278e+03
      Al      ka      Ca  1.7548e+03
      Al      ka      Si  5.4409e+02
      Al      ka      Al  4.0218e+02
      Al      ka      Mg  4.2884e+03
      Al      ka      O   1.5979e+03
      Al      ka      H   1.8043e+00
      Mg      ka      Na  5.2018e+03
      Mg      ka      K   2.3234e+03
      Mg      ka      Cl  1.5604e+03
      Mg      ka      Ba  6.3391e+03
      Mg      ka      F   3.1803e+03
      Mg      ka      Ti  3.2972e+03
      Mg      ka      Fe  5.2394e+03
      Mg      ka      Mn  4.6163e+03
      Mg      ka      Ca  2.7124e+03
      Mg      ka      Si  8.5871e+02
      Mg      ka      Al  6.3956e+02
      Mg      ka      Mg  4.8748e+02
      Mg      ka      O   2.5312e+03
      Mg      ka      H   3.1956e+00
      O       ka      Na  3.6300e+03 *
      O       ka      K   1.9369e+04
      O       ka      Cl  1.4300e+04 *
      O       ka      Ba  4.5194e+03
      O       ka      F   1.8500e+03 *
      O       ka      Ti  1.9900e+04 *
      O       ka      Fe  4.0000e+03 *
      O       ka      Mn  3.4700e+03 *
      O       ka      Ca  2.4600e+04 *
      O       ka      Si  8.7900e+03 *
      O       ka      Al  6.7200e+03 *
      O       ka      Mg  5.1700e+03 *
      O       ka      O   1.1999e+03
      O       ka      H   5.7430e+01
 * indicates empirical MAC

Empirical Mass Absorption Coefficients From:
C:\ProgramData\Probe Software\Probe for EPMA\EMPMAC.DAT

  Z-LINE   X-RAY Z-ABSOR     MAC
      O       ka      Na  3.6300e+03    Love et al. (1974)
      O       ka      Cl  1.4300e+04    Love et al. (1974)
      O       ka      F   1.8500e+03    Love et al. (1974)
      O       ka      Ti  1.9900e+04    Bastin  (1992)
      O       ka      Fe  4.0000e+03    Bastin  (1992)
      O       ka      Mn  3.4700e+03    Bastin  (1992)
      O       ka      Ca  2.4600e+04    Love et al. (1974)
      O       ka      Si  8.7900e+03    Bastin  (1992)
      O       ka      Al  6.7200e+03    Bastin  (1992)
      O       ka      Mg  5.1700e+03    Bastin  (1992)

Area Peak Factors were utilized to correct x-ray intensities for wavelength peak shift and/or shape changes for compound compositions by summing binary APF values.

See G. F. Bastin and H. J. M. Heijligers, Quantitative Electron Probe Microanalysis of Carbon in Binary Carbides, Parts I and II, X-Ray Spectr. 15: 135-150, 1986

Empirical Area Peak Factors (APF) From:
C:\ProgramData\Probe Software\Probe for EPMA\EMPAPF.DAT

  Z-LINE   X-RAY Z-ABSOR       APF   RE-NORM
      O       ka      Ti     .9796    1.0000    TiO2/Fe2O3/WSi/59.8
      O       ka      Fe     .9962    1.0000    Fe3O4/Fe2O3/WSi/59.8
      O       ka      Ca     .9700    1.0000    ----/Fe2O3/WSi/59.8
      O       ka      Si    1.0444    1.0000    SiO2/Fe2O3/WSi/59.8, Bastin
      O       ka      Al    1.0213    1.0000    Al2O3/Fe2O3/WSi/59.8, Bastin

Results are the average of 12 points and detection limits ranged from .005 weight percent for Mg ka to .006 weight percent for Si ka to .015 weight percent for Fe ka to .050 weight percent for O ka to .076 weight percent for Ba la.

Analytical sensitivity (at the 99% confidence level) ranged from .176 percent relative for Si ka to .455 percent relative for Al ka to 1.512 percent relative for K ka to 27.053 percent relative for Mn ka to 123.772 percent relative for Mg ka.

Oxygen equivalent from halogens (F/Cl/Br/I), was not subtracted in the matrix correction.


The quantitative blank correction was utilized.
The exponential or polynomial background fit was utilized.

See John J. Donovan, Heather A. Lowers and Brian G. Rusk, Improved electron probe microanalysis of trace elements in quartz, American Mineralogist, 96, 274­282, 2011

The matrix correction method was ZAF or Phi-Rho-Z Calculations and the mass absorption coefficients dataset was LINEMU   Henke (LBL, 1985) < 10KeV / CITZMU > 10KeV.

The ZAF or Phi-Rho-Z algorithm utilized was Armstrong/Love Scott (default).

See J. T. Armstrong, Quantitative analysis of silicates and oxide minerals: Comparison of Monte-Carlo, ZAF and Phi-Rho-Z procedures, Microbeam Analysis--1988, p 239-246


Many users find this type of output (and the associated .dat and .xlsx files) to be very useful when writing up results.  The exact output of course depends on the specific options utilized in your probe data file.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on May 26, 2017, 05:42:11 pm
I finally finished specifying the "material type" for most of the standards in my standard database as described above and here is a screen shot from the Add/Remove Standards To/From Run dialog:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/395_26_05_17_5_36_55.png)

This shows the standards specified as "apatites" or "phylosilicates".  My default standard.mdb files is attached below. One can copy this file to their ProgramData\Probe Software\Probe for EPMA folder if you don't mind overwriting your own standard database (this file is never overwritten by the CalcZAF or ProbeforEPMA installer).
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on June 20, 2017, 10:53:22 pm
I added a "magnification outline" feature to the PictureSnap window.  In other words, if the instrument is in scan mode, the PictureSnap window will now display the imaging area on the currently displayed image as seen in the attached images below (please login to see attachments).
john

Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on July 03, 2017, 10:27:31 pm
The latest version of Probe for EPMA (and CalcImage) now load images 10-15x faster than before.

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

Please update to version 11.9.4 and check it out.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 02, 2017, 08:29:59 pm
The latest version of Probe for EPMA (v. 11.9.6) has an almost complete set of pure element spectra from Penepma for 5 to 25 keV electron beams. 

This allows us to accurately simulate WDS spectra for the 5 to 25 keV range for teaching in the classroom without an electron microprobe for both JEOL and Cameca "demo" configurations.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 09, 2017, 12:37:56 pm
Anette von der Handt and I were "brainstorming" and we came up with a cool feature I think that will help with designating mapping areas on ones sample using Probe Image.

The idea is that when you have Probe Image open and using the 2 point mapping method to define the mapping area, one simply opens up PictureSnap and then loads an image file of the sample, which of course could be from any source (optical scan, low mag beam scan, mosaic map, flat bed scanner, cell phone camera, etc.), then after calibrating the image to the instrument stage, by clicking this menu in PictureSnap...

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_09_12_17_12_23_10.png)

the app will automatically draw a rectangle on the image, based on the two last stage positions that you double-clicked on (and of course also driving the stage to that sample position).  The first point you go to will look something like this:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_09_12_17_12_23_27.png)

The second point you drive to (double-click) will now show the rectangle and look something like this:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_09_12_17_12_23_42.png)

By alternately clicking the corners of the mapping area one can adjust the extents to exactly cover the phase or region desired.

Then from Probe Image one can click the Read X/Y or Read X2/Y2 button to record the corners of the area to be mapped as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_09_12_17_12_23_57.png)

The other thing we did which is also pretty cool is that now when one double-clicks on the full size image window in PictureSnap, the stage is of course driven to that position, but now the main PictureSnap window automatically adjusts to display the region that one clicked on. 

It difficult to capture an image showing this, but this automatic adjustment also occurs when using the Move To buttons in the PictureSnap calibration window. The automatic adjustment of the displayed image is especially nice when very large images (e.g., 20K x 20K pixels) are loaded in PictureSnap.

Try v. 12.1.1 of PFE and let us know what you think.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 10, 2017, 03:16:34 pm
In further thinking about this, Anette and I thought that adding a PictureSnap button to the traverse and grid digitize dialogs would be a good idea.

Therefore the PictureSnap window invoked from the digitize grid dialog will now automatically show a rectangle on the image (as shown in the previous post), while the traverse dialog invoked PictureSnap will show a line between the last two stage positions driven to, using a double click as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_10_12_17_3_09_51.png)

We had to disable some of the modeless window menus in PictureSnap, but still one can display previously digitized points using the Display menu, as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_10_12_17_3_10_13.png)

Try it out and see what you think!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Probeman on December 11, 2017, 10:58:49 am
The other thing we did which is also pretty cool is that now when one double-clicks on the full size image window in PictureSnap, the stage is of course driven to that position, but now the main PictureSnap window automatically adjusts to display the region that one clicked on. 

It difficult to capture an image showing this, but this automatic adjustment also occurs when using the Move To buttons in the PictureSnap calibration window. The automatic adjustment of the displayed image is especially nice when very large images (e.g., 20K x 20K pixels) are loaded in PictureSnap.

Try v. 12.1.1 of PFE and let us know what you think.

I needed to use PictureSnap this morning on the probe and I just have to say this automatic adjustment of the main PictureSnap window to where you moved the stage to using the "full view" window is pretty cool.

Would it make sense to also automatically adjust the main PictureSnap window display based on any stage move, say the user using the joystick to move the stage?
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on December 23, 2017, 10:29:15 pm
The latest version of Probe for EPMA (and CalcZAF), now defaults to HTTP for software updates as shown here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_23_12_17_10_25_59.png)

This means that those without firewall exceptions for FTP will have HTTP as the default download protocol. A small change but better.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 13, 2018, 10:15:52 am
A very minor thing really, but we made some small improvements to the wavescan (and std/unk) plot displays, by making the line (and symbol) colors brighter and also thickened the line width slightly. The original default line/symbol colors in the Pro Essentials graphics library were quite muted and difficult to distinguish when plotting multiple wavescans.

Here is what the new colors (and line thickness) looks like:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_13_01_18_10_12_23.png)

We also changed the colors of the current and sample off-peaks to better match other plots in PFE (where bright green shows the "current" values).   We hope these changes meet with everyone's approval!   :)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on February 04, 2018, 03:45:56 pm
We made a small tweak for the Penepma WDS simulation mode in Probe for EPMA.  As you might remember, if you acquire a standard sample in the PFE Penepma simulation mode, the program will calculate the emission intensities for the standard composition.  If you acquire an unknown or wavescan sample that has the same name (not case sensitive) as one of the standards in the run, the program will again calculate the emission intensities for that standard composition. 

If however you acquire an unknown or wavescan sample that has a name which does not match any standard names, the program will acquire a random composition based on the elements being acquired.

To see exactly what composition is being calculated for simulation, the program will now indicate in the status bar (at the bottom of the PFE log window), if it is acquiring a standard composition or a random composition as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_04_02_18_3_34_59.png)

It will subsequently display the concentrations of each element as it convolves the Penepma spectra to the resolution of the specific spectrometer/crystal/keV combination as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_04_02_18_3_35_15.png)

I find this display information helpful when running in Penepma simulation mode and maybe you all will also.   8)
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on April 18, 2018, 03:23:47 pm
As most of you know, Probe for EPMA can display images and overlay various information on them such as the data point locations, acquisition conditions, scale bar, data point labels, etc. as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_18_04_18_2_47_29.png)

A student recently asked me if she could output her images with the data point locations shown and modify the point labels to display the actual PPM of Ti for each point.  I said, not in PFE (yet!), but it's easy to export your images into Surfer and perform a "post" operation to display one's data points with any information labeled.

So what is the new feature? Well as most of you know you can set up the image overlay graphics as one prefers, from the Run | Display, Annotate and Export Analog Signal Images menu in Probe for EPMA.  And the program will then cycle through each image and output a BMP image of graphics overlay, plus a "raw" BMP image without any graphics, plus a .DAT file with the X, Y and line numbers, and a .ACQ file with the image stage calibration information, and a txt file with the analytical conditions.

So now, in addition to the above output files, Probe for EPMA will also output a .GRD file compatible with Golden Software's Surfer program as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_18_04_18_2_47_54.png)

The Surfer app is what we will then use to modify the point label graphics to display custom data values.  This process I will describe in a separate post in the Grapher/Surfer topic here:

http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=1066.msg7058#msg7058
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on January 27, 2019, 02:41:26 pm
This is a really cool new feature for automating presentation output for large numbers of traverse samples. From the Output menu select the new Output Automatic Traverse Plots as seen here:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i60.tinypic.com/2lkpjb7.jpg)

After the analysis data has been output, this dialog will appear:

(http://probesoftware.com/smf/oldpics/i59.tinypic.com/105we4i.jpg)

Select the options you want and click OK. The program will ask if you want to run the output script in Grapher. An example of the presentation output is seen attached below (remember to login to see attachments!).

I should mention the selection of the "customizable" Grapher script templates isn't implemented yet. Probably tomorrow...

Also, I should mention that this Grapher script runs much too slowly right now. We'll start optimizing it soon, but I wanted to get the feature out there for feedback and heck, automated output is always useful even if it is a little slow!

We modified the default scripts for automatic plotting of traverses in Grapher as first described here:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=42.msg2206#msg2206

So that the plotted lines are thicker allowing the user to more accurately see the color for each element as seen here:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_27_01_19_2_32_02.jpeg)

If you have modified your custom Grapher scripts TravXY_Custom1.bas, TravXY_Custom2.bas, etc., you will have to add the line highlighted in red:

Quote
                     'Coloring the line
                        LinePlot.line.foreColor = RGB(RScale%(i%), GScale%(i%), BScale%(i%))
                        LinePlot.line.width = 0.02

Note however, that the Output | Automatic Traverse Plots menu has been moved up near the top of the Output menu.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on April 06, 2019, 11:24:06 am
I recently posted about modifying the data subsets plotted by using the Customization Dialog menu. This is done by right clicking the quantitative histogram in the Pixel Extraction window in CalcImage as seen here and selecting the elements to display from the list:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=1144.msg8234#msg8234

but I'm posting another tip on modifying the displayed data sets (subsets) using the Customization Dialog dialog here in the Probe for EPMA Tips & Tricks topic, because just like the above method, this works for any plot display in CalcImage or Probe for EPMA.

Basically there is a Scrolling Subsets control in the Customization Dialog Subset tab as seen here with a single subset selected for display and the scrolling subset control clicked once so it advances to 1:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_03_04_19_10_09_04.png)

Apparently this plots the selected subset and the 1st scrolling subset. Then by clicking the scrolling subset control again, we again get the selected subset and also the 1st *and* 2nd subsets as seen here:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_03_04_19_10_09_18.png)

One can also select no subsets from the subset list and then simply click the scrolling subsets control and the Apply button, and then see each new subset appear in addition to all the preceding subsets.

I guess this could be useful for really complex plots?  Anyway, just FYI.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on June 29, 2019, 10:28:50 pm
During the QMA 2019 conference Emma Bullock made a good point in her integrated WDS EDS presentation, that if EDS net intensities are being displayed in Probe for EPMA during the automated acquisition (the default for Probe for EPMA), it can take a bit longer to acquire the data, because extracting the EDS net intensities for hundreds of points can take a bit of time.

Because of this I added a new global flag in Probe for EPMA that asks the user if they want to see the EDS net intensities displayed during the automated acquisition. Normally one would not be sitting there watching an automated acquisition, so no, you'd probably prefer to simply skip displaying the EDS net intensities (the WDS net intensities will still be displayed). So I bumped the Probe for EPMA version and the new 12.6.4 version now asks the user whether they want to see these EDS net intensities durng the automated acquisition (or not!):

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_29_06_19_10_19_35.png)

Thank-you Emma for a great idea!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on June 30, 2019, 02:29:31 pm
Philip Weigel from Hannover asked if we could step the stage during unknown acquisitions to reduce oxidation when making "flank method" measurements.

We have a "stage increment" feature already implemented in Probe for EPMA for wavescans and peaking, so it was an easy mod to add it for unknowns as seen below.  This is now available is v. 12.6.4 of Probe for EPMA. Update from your Help menu.

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_30_06_19_2_26_09.png)

Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: lsaper on July 09, 2019, 09:59:25 am
Hi John,

Is there an option to perform a 2d raster during acquisition instead of a linear increment?

Lee
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on July 09, 2019, 10:07:07 am
Hi John,

Is there an option to perform a 2d raster during acquisition instead of a linear increment?

Lee

Hi Lee,
Are you referring to the previous post?

You can certainly perform quant acquisitions using a scanned beam to reduce sample oxidation. Alternatively you can acquire a 2d x-ray map in Probe Image and quant it in CalcImage.  In fact, in Probe Image you can acquire multiple frames, then quant it in CalcImage using the TDI method to extrapolate the pixel intensities back to zero time.

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=912.0

But I have the feeling I'm not quite following your question. Can you provide an example of what you're trying to accomplish?
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on August 21, 2019, 07:26:48 pm
During the 2019 M&M meeting Anette von der Handt gave us a few suggestions that we thought would be useful to implement. They are now available with the current version (update from the Help menu), and include first, a new "string selection" feature in the Analyze! and Automate!  windows. With this feature you can type in a string and the program will auto select all samples that contain the string. For example in the Analyze! window screenshot here, the user has typed "MB2":

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_21_08_19_7_19_21.png)

We also re-arranged the controls a bit and second, brought out the "Display Samples with Data" checkbox and added another one of these checkboxes in the Plot! window, so one only sees samples that contain data, or at least contains "enabled" (not all disabled) data:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_21_08_19_7_20_27.png)

Here's a view of the new Automate! window with some re-arranged controls and the new "string selection" feature:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_21_08_19_7_19_42.png)

Maybe the layout in these windows are a bit more pleasing to the eye?
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 20, 2019, 05:27:26 pm
We modified the output from the Run | List Standard Compositions menu here:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_20_11_19_5_14_22.png)

To include output of the average atomic number (Zbar) values for each standard as seen here:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_20_11_19_5_14_38.png)

Update Probe for EPMA now for this tweak which some may find useful.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 21, 2019, 01:07:24 pm
The latest version of PFE 12.7.8 has a new option for the "filament standby" option which is accessed from the Automate! window as seen here:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_21_11_19_12_37_59.png)

To utilize this new filament standby option you should edit your probewin.ini as follows in the [hardware] section:

FilamentStandbyType=4
FilamentStandbyExternalScript=”<path>\<file>.PCC”

A complete excerpt of these keywords is here from the Probewin help file:

Quote
FilamentStandbyType=0
The filament standby type for tungsten instruments (ThermalFieldEmissionPresent=0). The default is zero to just reduce the heat to the standby level. To reduce the heat AND turn off the HV, set FilamentStandbyType = 1. To only reduce the HV but leave the heat on (LaB6 filaments), set FilamentStandbyType = 2. To run an external script, set FilamentStandbyType = 3.  To load a previously saved probe column condition file (.PCC), set FilamentStandbyType = 4.

If the instrument is a JEOL 8530 the FilamentStandbyType has no effect, and this feature will simply close the gun valve (V1) in filament standby mode (ON) and open the gun valve in filament standby mode (OFF)- assuming the specimen vacuum is within the allowable range.

FilamentStandbyExternalScript=””
The name of the external script or .PCC probe column condition file to be run if the FilamentStandbyType = 3 or FilamentStandby = 4. For the external script this can be any executable, e.g., .exe, .bat, etc. The full path to the external script must be specified, e.g., “C:\UserData\Shutdown.bat”. For the .PCC probe column condition file, the full path to the .PCC file must be specified, e.g., “C:\UserData\ColumnPCCData\Filament_Standby.PCC”
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: theo_nt on November 22, 2019, 08:10:11 am
Hi John,

from some reason I cannot see the new checkbox the option in the automate. The new version 12.7.8 has been installed but  I still have the old automate window.

Theo
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 22, 2019, 08:27:57 am
Hi Theo,
The Use Filament Standby Afterwards checkbox option is and always has been there.  It might be grayed out if you don't have one or more Automation Actions selected at the top.
john
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Gseward on November 22, 2019, 01:20:38 pm
John,

I think I see the source of the confusion:

On the Cameca FEG instrument, the .ini entry:

ThermalFieldEmissionPresent=1

Will be present. This (I believe) means that instead of:

"Use Filament Standby Afterwards"

appearing in the Automate! window, the FEG text:

"Close FE Gun Valve Afterwards"

will be present. I suspect however that the functionality of the radio will be the same regardless of the text. Can you confirm this???

Or do we need:

 ThermalFieldEmissionPresent=0 

even when it should be =1

Gareth

Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: theo_nt on November 22, 2019, 01:41:08 pm
John, this is my Automate after update
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 22, 2019, 01:51:18 pm
John, this is my Automate after update

Hi Theo,
Ah, I see. Yes, it's as Gareth wrote below.

Because you have declared that you have a FEG instrument, it thinks you should have an automated gun valve, and you do, it's just that Cameca has not provided us with a method to automate the gun valve.  We have asked them!

So yes, as Gareth says, just check that box and as long as you changed the FilamentStandbyType=4 in your Probewin.ini file it should load the .PCC file specified in the FilamentStandbyExternalScript keyword.

As soon as we get a chance we will fix the label on that checkbox to reflect Cameca FEG instruments.  It was just that we were only thinking of JEOL FEG instruments when we did that!

Sorry for the confusion!   :-[
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 22, 2019, 02:06:19 pm
Or do we need:

 ThermalFieldEmissionPresent=0 

even when it should be =1


Absolutely do not change this!  If you have a FEG instrument, you need to specify that it is a a FEG instrument!
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: theo_nt on November 22, 2019, 02:07:17 pm
John,
yes it works, thanks a lot
Theo
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on November 22, 2019, 02:10:58 pm
Cool.  I think using a .PCC file for filament standby will be useful for others as well.

Thanks for getting me to do this.  We should have an updated version with the correct checkbox caption in about 5 or 6 hours for you to update to.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: Gseward on November 23, 2019, 06:39:41 am
Whilst we are on the topic of .PCC files: I made some observations on a SX5 FEG that might require some consideration. You can move the post if it needs to go somewhere else.

As I understand it, the SX5 has some extra column parameters that are associated with the deflection of the bean in/out of the faraday cup. There may also be some other parameters associated with the FEG column that I forgot about.  Hence, currently,  the full definition of the column condition is probably not being read/written. Discovering the extra parameters might require someone with an SX5 doing a little investigation....... 
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 01, 2020, 10:07:16 am
We recently added a new button in the Imaging and Digitize Image windows in Probe for EPMA. These two windows of course allows one to acquire analog signal images and/or digitize points on the acquired image:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_01_05_20_9_51_06.png)

This new Load Image button now allows the user to load an external image that was acquired by another application, for example the JEOL or Cameca OEM software, or even the Bruker, Thermo or JEOL EDS software, *as long as the current stage position and mag or FOV have not been changed* since the image was acquired.

The idea is similar to how PictureSnapApp can load an externally acquired image file from whatever source, and then calibrate the image based on the current stage position and mag or FOV:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=1094.msg7332#msg7332

Normally the image will be the same aspect ratio as the aspect ratio defined in PFE (since the image will be acquired on the same instrument), but this feature will automatically "crop" the image if necessary to match the current aspect ratio defined in Probe for EPMA.

Once the image is acquired in the Digitize Image window, it can be utilized for digitizing points as usual:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=138.msg559#msg559

If your external image file was saved on the same computer as Probe for EPMA, just browse to the image file (BMP, GIF or JPG), and select it.  If the image is saved to a separate computer, you should create a shared folder on that other computer and link to it. I usually place a shortcut on my desktop to the shared folder if I'm going to be accessing it regularly.
Title: Re: New Features In Probe for EPMA
Post by: John Donovan on May 08, 2020, 12:06:39 pm
Along with the Penepma16.zip distribution, we've also updated the penepma12.zip distribution to include these Li, Be and B emissions. This is to allow Probe for EPMA to simulate WDS spectra containing these elements in "demo" mode for teaching EPMA and other "off-line" WDS modeling needs.

To perform these WDS simulations in Probe for EPMA, you should update Probe for EPMA using the Help menu as usual, to v. 12.8.6. After Probe for EPMA is updated, use the same update dialog again, but this time check the box "Update Penepma Monte Carlo Files Only", and download the update again.  The updated Penepma files will be automatically unzipped.

Once that is done you can create WDS spectra simulations such as this for pure Be metal (after properly peaking the "simulated" spectrometer of course!):

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_08_05_20_9_56_46.png)

Note that on this PC2.5 LDE the Be Ka emission line is quite close to the spectrometer limit, but it might be doable though I don't have any experimental data to compare it with. And this for Beryl (Be3Al2Si6O18) which has about 5 wt% Be:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_08_05_20_9_57_06.png)

Note that in the beryl simulation you can see the approach of higher order oxygen lines to the left of the Be Ka emission.

As a slight aside, the discerning eye may notice that sometimes the red line showing the peak center does not line up exactly with the KLM markers line (in brown). This is more easily seen in this scan of boron Ka in boron nitride (BN) which also contains some carbon and oxygen:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_04_05_20_12_52_21.png)

One will also notice that the carbon Ka and O Ka II KLM markers are also off from their peak positions. Why is this you may ask?

Well it's simply due to the fact that we utilize the Armstrong x-ray database from Cal Tech for the actual peak positions (and quantification), but we utilize the NIST x-ray database for the KLM markers, and unfortunately they don't always agree exactly.  In fact the Cal Tech table has B Ka at 0.1834 keV, while the NIST table has it at 0.185 keV. This plot in keV space makes this offset quite clear:

(https://probesoftware.com/smf/gallery/1_05_05_20_7_21_14.png)

These database discrepancies are usually seen for the light element emission lines, and since these line positions are very subject to chemical state shifts, we don't think one should worry too much about it.  However, if it really bothers anyone, you can edit the emission (and edge) energies that Probe for EPMA (and CalcZAF) utilize by following these instructions:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=81.msg9208#msg9208