Author Topic: JEOL mapping software question  (Read 441 times)

Probeman

  • Emeritus
  • *****
  • Posts: 1947
  • Never sleeps...
    • John Donovan
JEOL mapping software question
« on: November 26, 2018, 06:40:34 pm »
We've been doing quite a few of these maps now and the procedure is complicated (including 2 things in the JEOL software I need to work around).

Hi Karsten,
I agree a polygon acquisition method in Probe Image would be awesome, but now you've got me curious.  What is the problem with quantification of maps using the JEOL software to acquire the x-ray maps?  If quantification of x-ray maps acquired with Probe Image works, it should also work with x-ray maps acquired in the JEOL software!   What I mean is, milliseconds per pixel are milliseconds per pixel!  Or are they not?
john
« Last Edit: November 26, 2018, 06:42:54 pm by Probeman »
The only stupid question is the one not asked!

Karsten Goemann

  • Global Moderator
  • Professor
  • *****
  • Posts: 194
Re: JEOL mapping software question
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2018, 07:21:44 pm »
What is the problem with quantification of maps using the JEOL software to acquire the x-ray maps?  If quantification of x-ray maps acquired with Probe Image works, it should also work with x-ray maps acquired in the JEOL software!   What I mean is, milliseconds per pixel are milliseconds per pixel!  Or are they not?
john

Well that's what I would have thought. It's something I haven't been able to figure out yet. It seems that in particular for high count rates the actual intensities in the JEOL maps are higher than point intensities acquired by PFE. It's too much to just be dead time correction. So far it seems reproducible. I need to document this better and more systematically so I can also send it to JEOL to have a look at. I haven't actually tried to do the whole procedure in the JEOL software only (including quant) or acquiring the maps with ProbeImage and go through the whole procedure using ProbeSoftware only. These are all grain mounts in epoxy, so I don't want to burn lots epoxy using rectangular acquisition shapes. But for testing I can obviously map a small enough area or a different sample where this isn't a problem. Ben Buse doesn't seem to have this issue on his 8530.

Probeman

  • Emeritus
  • *****
  • Posts: 1947
  • Never sleeps...
    • John Donovan
Re: JEOL mapping software question
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2018, 01:01:29 pm »
Ben Buse doesn't seem to have this issue on his 8530.

This is interesting.

I'm going out on a limb here but because Probe Image uses the same low level mapping call that the JEOL software uses, and because it works for Ben Buse at Bristol on his 8530, I would guess that there must be a software setting somewhere in the JEOL software that is causing the problem.
The only stupid question is the one not asked!