<p>A review and interlaboratory comparison of secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) data obtained by laboratories participating in the International Technical Nuclear Forensics Working Group (ITWG) 7th Collaborative Material Exercise (CMX-7) has been conducted. The analyzed materials were two uranium compounds in powder form and two pieces of uranium metal. The instruments used in this comparison were a small-geometry (SG) SIMS, CAMECA IMS 7f from the Research Centre Rez, and a large-geometry (LG) SIMS, CAMECA IMS 1280 from Los Alamos National Laboratory. Despite the differences in instruments and analytical procedures, e.g., sample preparation, SIMS setups, and data post-processing, there was good agreement for the <sup>234</sup>U/<sup>238</sup>U, <sup>235</sup>U/<sup>238</sup>U, and <sup>236</sup>U/<sup>238</sup>U ratios in the analyzed materials. The main difference was in the precision, which was, as expected, higher for the LG-SIMS. In addition, a comparison between the laboratories was also made for the image processing algorithms applied to raw data acquired in automated particle measurement (APM) mode. The result of this comparison has led to identification of best practices for setting up parameters of the APM software.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Interlaboratory comparison of secondary ion mass spectrometry analysis results from the 7th international technical nuclear forensics working group collaborative material exercise

  • Jan Lorincik,
  • Travis J. Tenner,
  • Ivan Elantyev,
  • Ruth Kips,
  • Ming-Chang Liu,
  • Joseph Swider

摘要

A review and interlaboratory comparison of secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) data obtained by laboratories participating in the International Technical Nuclear Forensics Working Group (ITWG) 7th Collaborative Material Exercise (CMX-7) has been conducted. The analyzed materials were two uranium compounds in powder form and two pieces of uranium metal. The instruments used in this comparison were a small-geometry (SG) SIMS, CAMECA IMS 7f from the Research Centre Rez, and a large-geometry (LG) SIMS, CAMECA IMS 1280 from Los Alamos National Laboratory. Despite the differences in instruments and analytical procedures, e.g., sample preparation, SIMS setups, and data post-processing, there was good agreement for the 234U/238U, 235U/238U, and 236U/238U ratios in the analyzed materials. The main difference was in the precision, which was, as expected, higher for the LG-SIMS. In addition, a comparison between the laboratories was also made for the image processing algorithms applied to raw data acquired in automated particle measurement (APM) mode. The result of this comparison has led to identification of best practices for setting up parameters of the APM software.