Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis

479 27

. Table 27.1 Fixed-beam analysis at the center of. Fig. 27.12; NIST DTSA II analysis with pure element and microanalysis glass standards

O Na Mg Al Si K Ca Ti Mn Fe Ni Cu

0.2742 ±

0.0003

0.0420 ±

0.0005

0.0196 ±

0.0002

0.0210 ±

0.0001

0.0458 ±

0.0002

0.0100 ±

0.0000

0.0267 ±

0.0001

0.0031 ±

0.0000

0.4412 ±

0.0003

0.0834 ±

0.0002

0.0196 ±

0.0001

0.0134 ±

0.0002

Al Fe

0.001 0.01 0.1 1.0

0.1 1.0 10 100 wt%

Mn 20 μm

. Fig. 27.16 SEM/EDS X-ray spectrum imaging maps after quantitative analysis with DTSA-II presented with logarithmic three-band encoding for
Al, Fe, and Mn. Note Fe-enrichment band

at an energy of 0.523 keV suffers strong absorption when the
electron beam is located in the crack, so that the intensity is
greatly reduced, producing an accurate representation of the
crack. The MnK-L2,3 (5.898  keV) and NiK-L2,3 (7.477  keV)
photons have higher energy and suffer much less absorption,
so that most of those photons generated when the beam is in
the crack still escape despite having to pass through more
material to reach the EDS, greatly reducing the contrast of
the cracks relative to the surrounding matrix.

References

Meese W, Beausoliel R (1977) Exploratory study of glowing electrical

connections”. Nat Bur Stand (US) Build Sci Ser 103:29

Newbury D (1982) What is causing failures of aluminum wire connec-

tions in residential circuits? Anal Chem 54:1059A–1064A

Newbury D, Greenwald S (1980) Observations on the mechanisms of

high resistance junction formation in aluminum wire connections. J

Res Nat Bur Stand US 85:429–440

Rabinow J (1978) Some thoughts on electrical connections. Nat Bur

Stand US NBSIR:78–1507

References