I recently made an official request for an agenda item at the next M&M this summer to Tom Kelly regarding MAS support of standard material development for the SEM/EPMA community. Here is my letter:
Hi Tom,
Ed Vicenzi suggested I request an agenda item on the possibility of the MAS society funding standard materials development for the next council meeting. Unfortunately I will not be attending the M&M conference this year. So I would like for you to present this as described below. I am aware that the FIGMAS group is already consolidating information on existing standards, but I feel that we do not need a year of study to realize that we have serious deficiencies in our standards for some critical elements (e.g., alkali metals, halogens, etc.). I propose:
1. The technique of x-ray emission quantification depends on high quality and sufficient quantities of standard materials. This is particularly true for WDS and I would argue for EDS as well (delete the standardless button!).
2. Most standard materials available from traditional sources (the Smithsonian for example), are natural materials with well documented issues of inclusions and variable composition, and are available only in "fly speck" quantities. Commercial standards are expensive and also problematic for similar reasons.
3. Today, synthetic single crystals of high purity (all traces below detection limits) that are stoichiometrically constrained by thermodynamics, can be produced in 0.1 to 1.0 kilogram quantities quite easily by those with expertise. Thus relieving us of the problems with "fly speck" quantities and variable compositions and/or inclusions in our standard materials. Every EPMA/SEM lab in the world should have a gram of these materials. Then we are all "on the same page" so to speak...
3. We have demonstrated that an ideal (beam stable, insoluble, stoichiometric and high purity), standard for Rb (RbTiOPO4), can be synthesized and is *already* available to all at $100/gram (such as deal). See here for details:
http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=301.msg2872#msg28724. A effort to identify further possible candidates for synthesis has begun here (you must be logged in to see the poll results):
http://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=560.0The current winner by popular demand is a cesium zirconyl phosphate which would be beam stable, insoluble in water and stoichiometric. A quotation from one synthesis firm will give the society 50 grams of material for $5K (or 100 grams for $10K). In other words we can break even on our investment at $100/gram! I don't really care where/who distributes these "community standards", but I think we need to start a program to begin this process even if it is one lonely standard material at a time!
5. A good use of the society's money is student support and decent food, but I would argue that standard development efforts are a seriously neglected area for a society whose flagship method (EPMA/SEM) is entirely dependent on high quality and readily available standards. As NIST will only produce glasses which are compositionally problematic (how do we know what we just made, and is it homogeneous?), single crystal synthesis seems a worthy cause to add to the society's mission.
What can we do to advance this agenda? I would be happy to discuss this by phone. Thanks for your support.
john
Here is Tom's reply:
Hi John,
This is an excellent idea and I thank you for advocating. I will indeed put this on the agenda and yes, please feel free to publicize this issue. I agree with your arguments.
We mainly will need to be sure that the finances and logistics work out and I assume that others in the community will agree with the sentiments you express here.
I will present this at Council.
Keep me informed.
Regards,
Tom
Comments/suggestions?