XRD and XRF are highly complementary
materials analysis methods which, when used
together, greatly improve the accuracy of
phase identification and quantitative analysis.
The combination of both methods provides an
increase in the numbers of measured parameters,
which means that fewer assumptions are needed
for analysis. This in turn provides not only greater
accuracy of results, but also increases the range
of samples that can be measured to include
samples about which little or nothing is known in
advance.
XRD is the most direct and accurate analytical
method for determining the presence and
absolute amounts of mineral species in a sample.
Ambiguous results may be obtained however, if
the sample chemistry and/or origin are unknown.
In these cases phase identification can be difficult;
in particular, isostructural phases with similar
chemical composition will give similar powder
diffraction patterns.
In contrast to XRD, XRF provides highly accurate
information about the elemental composition
of a sample, but it cannot deliver direct phase
information. Mass-balance calculations may give
sufficient phase information in some cases, but
can also lead to meaningless results e.g. in the
presence of polymorphs.
It is the complimentary nature of the XRD and
XRFmethods which makes them a valuable
tool for quantitative phase analysis in numerous
applications ranging from scientific research
to industrial high-throughput quality control.
Particularily in mineralogical and geological
application areas, the combined use of XRD and
XRF is booming, offering completely new insights
into materials and processes. Typical examples
are the cement, minerals & mining, and industrial
minerals industries, where the quality of products
and / or efficiency of processes is governed by
both phase and elemental composition. The
combined use of XRD and XRF methods allows
the reliable analysis of materials, for which the
individual methods fail to deliver accurate and
reliable results.
Page 2
Quantitative phase and element analysis of
host/waste rocks and tailings is an important
application in the minerals and mining industry
with respect to both process optimization (e.g.
acid leaching) and environmental protection:
Mining and milling operations are responsible
for the production of billions of tonnes of waste
rock and finely crushed tailings worldwide. An
important application is the knowledge of the
relative amounts of the minerals with acid-
producing or neutralization potential for successful
acid-base accounting with respect to both the
leaching process as well as acid mine drainage,
with its detrimental effects on environment.
As an example, we report combined XRD-XRF
analysis of an intrusive rock with unknown
composition. Of particular interest was its
classification by mineral content as well as
the detection and accurate quantification of
potentially present minerals with significant acid-
producing or neutralization potential.
Powder diffraction data were recorded using a
D4 ENDEAVOR powder diffractometer equipped
with a LynxEye
TM
detector (Fig. 1); the total
measurement time required was about 5 minutes.
For phase identification and quantification,
the DIFFRAC
plus
software packages EVA,
SEARCH and TOPAS were used. Standardless
XRFmeasurements on the same sample were
performed with the S4 PIONEER and the
SPECTRA
plus
software (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1: D4 ENDEAVOR diffractometer (right)
and S4 PIONEER spectrometer (left) connected
with conveyer belt. The D4 is equipped with
Super Speed LynxEye
TM
detector.
Fig. 2: EVA phase identification results.
1) Phase identification
Fig. 2 and Tab. 1 show the XRD powder data and
the phase identification results. The major rock
forming minerals plagioclase, quartz, diopside
and muscovite are easily and correctly identified
in a single default run. Note, that the highly
sensitive SEARCH algorithm clearly prefers albite
(Na-plagioclase) versus anorthite (Ca-plagioclase)
as a result of the slightly different lattice
parameters of both plagioclase solid solution
end members. Best SEARCH figure-of-merits
obtained for the individual phases were 0.65 and
1.48, respectively. Neither ore minerals nor any
K-feldspars or feldspathoids could be detected.
Tab. 1: EVA phase identification results.
SS-VVV-PPPP
Compound Name
00-009-0466 (*)
Albite
00-041-1480 (I)
Albite, calcian
03-065-0466 (C)
Quartz low, syn
01-087-0700 (C)
Diopside, syn
01-089-5402 (C)
Muscovite 2M1
Page 3
Fig. 3: EVA combined XRD-XRF results -
comparison of calculated (column "SQD") versus
observed (column "XRF") element concentrations.
The difference is given in column "Delta".
2) Combined XRD-XRF analysis
To confirm the phase identification results,
and to obtain semi-quantitative phase amount
estimates consistent with the actual elemental
composition of the sample, combined XRD-XRF
analysis has been performed with EVA. EVA
enables semi-quantitative analysis based on the
reference-intensity-ratio (RIR) method using both
XRD as well as XRFdata simultaneously: On
scaling the maximum intensities of the ICDD PDF
patterns to the observed peaks in the powder
pattern, EVA calculates both phase and element
concentrations, and compares the latter with the
actually measured element concentrations.
Element concentrations as obtained by XRF and
used by EVA are provided in Tab. 2. Already at
first glance, the XRF data fully confirm the absence
of any significant acid-producing ore minerals
due to the minor concentrations found for heavy
elements and the absence of sulphur.
Tab. 2: Element concentrations [%] as obtained by XRF.
Oxygen
47.7
Silicon
30.0
Aluminum 9.75
Sodium
6.1
Calcium
3.66
Magnesium 0.456
Iron
1.35
Potassium
0.271
Phosphorus 0.114
Chlorine
0.0445
Titanium
0.252
Manganese 0.0173
Cobalt
0.0182
Nickel
0.0142
Strontium
0.0595
Zirconium
0.0143
Barium
0.0258
Wolfram
0.101
The results for combined XRD-XRF analysis with
EVA are shown in Fig. 3 and Tab. 3. The high Na
vs. Ca concentrations confirm the presence of Na-
plagioclase as found by XRD (diopside accounts
for about 60% of the total Ca, as calculated
by EVA). The present Na-plagioclase is most
successfully modelled using two albite phases
with different Ca amounts. Note the excellent
agreement found between the calculated and
observed element concentrations, which is better
than 1% for all elements, and therefore confirms
the correctness of the XRD phase identification
results for all phases.
The accuracy of the RIR method is limited by
several factors such as preferred orientation
effects and the quality of the ICDD PDF data used
(e.g. quality of relative intensities, I/Icor values,
idealized chemical formula).
Tab. 3: EVA semi-quantitative phase analysis
results based on combined XRD-XRF using
reference intensities as given in the ICDD PDF
patterns.
SS-VVV-PPPP
Compound Name
Phase
amounts
00-009-0466 (*)
Albite
58.2%
00-041-1480 (I)
Albite, calcian
15.4%
03-065-0466 (C) Quartz low, syn
14.0%
01-087-0700 (C) Diopside, syn
9.9%
01-089-5402 (C) Muscovite 2M1
2.6%
The most accurate quantitative results will be
obtained from a TOPAS Rietveld refinement. The
combined XRD-XRF results obtained are of high
value for defining the refinement model.
Page 4
BRUKER AXS, INC.
5465 EAST ChERYL pARKwAY
MADISON, wI 53711-5373
USA
TEL. (+1) (800) 234-XRAY
TEL. (+1) (608) 276-3000
FAX (+1) (608) 276-3006
email info@bruker-axs.com
www.bruker-axs.com
All configurations and specifications are subject to change without notice. Order No. L88-E00058. © 2006 BRUKER AXS GmbH. Printed in Germany.
BRUKER AXS GMBh
OESTLIChE RhEINBRUECKENSTR. 49
D-76187 KARLSRUhE
GERMANY
TEL. (+49) (0)(721)595-2888
FAX (+49) (0)(721)595-4587
EMAIL info@bruker-axs.de
www.bruker-axs.de
BRUKER AXS K.K
3-9-A, MORIYA, KANAGAwA
YOKOhAMA, KANAGAwA 221-0022
TEL. (+81) 45 453 1963
FAX (+81) 45 440 0757
www.bruker-axs.com
3) Quantitative TOPAS refinement
Quantitative Rietveld analysis has been
performed using TOPAS, the results are shown
in Fig. 4 and Tab. 4. For the final refinement
two Na-plagioclases with different compositions
have been used to model the data to take the
elemental analysis results into account: Albite (0%
Ca) and Oligoclase (25% Ca).
From the results in Tab. 4 the following
conclusions can be drawn:
1. The sample can be unambiguously classified as
a quartzdiorite according to Streckeisen, see Fig. 5.
2. Combined XRD-XRF analysis and TOPAS
Rietveld refinement can allow a distinction of even
neighboring plagioclase solid solution members
(here albite and oligoclase) if present in sufficient
amounts.
The present sample can be characterised as
a rock with insignificant acid producing or
neutralisation potential. Remarkable is the easy
and reliable determination of the plagioclase type
for estimation of the neutralisation potential. This
ability is of particular interest, as anorthite has
an about 14x higher neutralisation potential than
albite (e.g. Jambor et al., 2002).
Fig. 4: Quantitative TOPAS refinement results.
Tab. 4: Quantitative TOPAS refinement results.
Compound Name
Phase amounts
Albite
49.6%
Oligoclase
30.5%
Quartz
9.9%
Diopside
8.8%
Muscovite
1.2%
Fig. 5: Streckeisen diagram for intrusive rocks.
Q: quartz, A: alkali-feldspar, P: plagioclase.
Reference
J.L. Jambor, J.E. Dutrizac, L.A. Groat, M. Raudsepp.
Environmental Geology (2002) 43, 1-17.
Q
A
P
granite
grano-
diorite
quartz-rich
granodiorite
quartz-
syenite
quartz-
monzonite
quartz-
monzo-
diorite
quartz-
diorite
tonalite
XRD and XRF are highly complementary
materials analysis methods which, when used
together, greatly improve the accuracy of
phase identification and quantitative analysis.
The combination of both methods provides an
increase in the numbers of measured parameters,
which means that fewer assumptions are needed
for analysis. This in turn provides not only greater
accuracy of results, but also increases the range
of samples that can be measured to include
samples about which little or nothing is known in
advance.
XRD is the most direct and accurate analytical
method for determining the presence and
absolute amounts of mineral species in a sample.
Ambiguous results may be obtained however, if
the sample chemistry and/or origin are unknown.
In these cases phase identification can be difficult;
in particular, isostructural phases with similar
chemical composition will give similar powder
diffraction patterns.
In contrast to XRD, XRF provides highly accurate
information about the elemental composition
of a sample, but it cannot deliver direct phase
information. Mass-balance calculations may give
sufficient phase information in some cases, but
can also lead to meaningless results e.g. in the
presence of polymorphs.
It is the complimentary nature of the XRD and
XRFmethods which makes them a valuable
tool for quantitative phase analysis in numerous
applications ranging from scientific research
to industrial high-throughput quality control.
Particularily in mineralogical and geological
application areas, the combined use of XRD and
XRF is booming, offering completely new insights
into materials and processes. Typical examples
are the cement, minerals & mining, and industrial
minerals industries, where the quality of products
and / or efficiency of processes is governed by
both phase and elemental composition. The
combined use of XRD and XRF methods allows
the reliable analysis of materials, for which the
individual methods fail to deliver accurate and
reliable results.
Page 2
Quantitative phase and element analysis of
host/waste rocks and tailings is an important
application in the minerals and mining industry
with respect to both process optimization (e.g.
acid leaching) and environmental protection:
Mining and milling operations are responsible
for the production of billions of tonnes of waste
rock and finely crushed tailings worldwide. An
important application is the knowledge of the
relative amounts of the minerals with acid-
producing or neutralization potential for successful
acid-base accounting with respect to both the
leaching process as well as acid mine drainage,
with its detrimental effects on environment.
As an example, we report combined XRD-XRF
analysis of an intrusive rock with unknown
composition. Of particular interest was its
classification by mineral content as well as
the detection and accurate quantification of
potentially present minerals with significant acid-
producing or neutralization potential.
Powder diffraction data were recorded using a
D4 ENDEAVOR powder diffractometer equipped
with a LynxEye
TM
detector (Fig. 1); the total
measurement time required was about 5 minutes.
For phase identification and quantification,
the DIFFRAC
plus
software packages EVA,
SEARCH and TOPAS were used. Standardless
XRFmeasurements on the same sample were
performed with the S4 PIONEER and the
SPECTRA
plus
software (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1: D4 ENDEAVOR diffractometer (right)
and S4 PIONEER spectrometer (left) connected
with conveyer belt. The D4 is equipped with
Super Speed LynxEye
TM
detector.
Fig. 2: EVA phase identification results.
1) Phase identification
Fig. 2 and Tab. 1 show the XRD powder data and
the phase identification results. The major rock
forming minerals plagioclase, quartz, diopside
and muscovite are easily and correctly identified
in a single default run. Note, that the highly
sensitive SEARCH algorithm clearly prefers albite
(Na-plagioclase) versus anorthite (Ca-plagioclase)
as a result of the slightly different lattice
parameters of both plagioclase solid solution
end members. Best SEARCH figure-of-merits
obtained for the individual phases were 0.65 and
1.48, respectively. Neither ore minerals nor any
K-feldspars or feldspathoids could be detected.
Tab. 1: EVA phase identification results.
SS-VVV-PPPP
Compound Name
00-009-0466 (*)
Albite
00-041-1480 (I)
Albite, calcian
03-065-0466 (C)
Quartz low, syn
01-087-0700 (C)
Diopside, syn
01-089-5402 (C)
Muscovite 2M1
Page 3
Fig. 3: EVA combined XRD-XRF results -
comparison of calculated (column "SQD") versus
observed (column "XRF") element concentrations.
The difference is given in column "Delta".
2) Combined XRD-XRF analysis
To confirm the phase identification results,
and to obtain semi-quantitative phase amount
estimates consistent with the actual elemental
composition of the sample, combined XRD-XRF
analysis has been performed with EVA. EVA
enables semi-quantitative analysis based on the
reference-intensity-ratio (RIR) method using both
XRD as well as XRFdata simultaneously: On
scaling the maximum intensities of the ICDD PDF
patterns to the observed peaks in the powder
pattern, EVA calculates both phase and element
concentrations, and compares the latter with the
actually measured element concentrations.
Element concentrations as obtained by XRF and
used by EVA are provided in Tab. 2. Already at
first glance, the XRF data fully confirm the absence
of any significant acid-producing ore minerals
due to the minor concentrations found for heavy
elements and the absence of sulphur.
Tab. 2: Element concentrations [%] as obtained by XRF.
Oxygen
47.7
Silicon
30.0
Aluminum 9.75
Sodium
6.1
Calcium
3.66
Magnesium 0.456
Iron
1.35
Potassium
0.271
Phosphorus 0.114
Chlorine
0.0445
Titanium
0.252
Manganese 0.0173
Cobalt
0.0182
Nickel
0.0142
Strontium
0.0595
Zirconium
0.0143
Barium
0.0258
Wolfram
0.101
The results for combined XRD-XRF analysis with
EVA are shown in Fig. 3 and Tab. 3. The high Na
vs. Ca concentrations confirm the presence of Na-
plagioclase as found by XRD (diopside accounts
for about 60% of the total Ca, as calculated
by EVA). The present Na-plagioclase is most
successfully modelled using two albite phases
with different Ca amounts. Note the excellent
agreement found between the calculated and
observed element concentrations, which is better
than 1% for all elements, and therefore confirms
the correctness of the XRD phase identification
results for all phases.
The accuracy of the RIR method is limited by
several factors such as preferred orientation
effects and the quality of the ICDD PDF data used
(e.g. quality of relative intensities, I/Icor values,
idealized chemical formula).
Tab. 3: EVA semi-quantitative phase analysis
results based on combined XRD-XRF using
reference intensities as given in the ICDD PDF
patterns.
SS-VVV-PPPP
Compound Name
Phase
amounts
00-009-0466 (*)
Albite
58.2%
00-041-1480 (I)
Albite, calcian
15.4%
03-065-0466 (C) Quartz low, syn
14.0%
01-087-0700 (C) Diopside, syn
9.9%
01-089-5402 (C) Muscovite 2M1
2.6%
The most accurate quantitative results will be
obtained from a TOPAS Rietveld refinement. The
combined XRD-XRF results obtained are of high
value for defining the refinement model.
Page 4
BRUKER AXS, INC.
5465 EAST ChERYL pARKwAY
MADISON, wI 53711-5373
USA
TEL. (+1) (800) 234-XRAY
TEL. (+1) (608) 276-3000
FAX (+1) (608) 276-3006
EMAIL info@bruker-axs.com
www.bruker-axs.com
All configurations and specifications are subject to change without notice. Order No. L88-E00058. © 2006 BRUKER AXS GmbH. Printed in Germany.
BRUKER AXS GMBh
OESTLIChE RhEINBRUECKENSTR. 49
D-76187 KARLSRUhE
GERMANY
TEL. (+49) (0)(721)595-2888
FAX (+49) (0)(721)595-4587
EMAIL info@bruker-axs.de
www.bruker-axs.de
BRUKER AXS K.K
3-9-A, MORIYA, KANAGAwA
YOKOhAMA, KANAGAwA 221-0022
JApAN
TEL. (+81) 45 453 1963
FAX (+81) 45 440 0757
www.bruker-axs.com
3) Quantitative TOPAS refinement
Quantitative Rietveld analysis has been
performed using TOPAS, the results are shown
in Fig. 4 and Tab. 4. For the final refinement
two Na-plagioclases with different compositions
have been used to model the data to take the
elemental analysis results into account: Albite (0%
Ca) and Oligoclase (25% Ca).
From the results in Tab. 4 the following
conclusions can be drawn:
1. The sample can be unambiguously classified as
a quartzdiorite according to Streckeisen, see Fig. 5.
2. Combined XRD-XRF analysis and TOPAS
Rietveld refinement can allow a distinction of even
neighboring plagioclase solid solution members
(here albite and oligoclase) if present in sufficient
amounts.
The present sample can be characterised as
a rock with insignificant acid producing or
neutralisation potential. Remarkable is the easy
and reliable determination of the plagioclase type
for estimation of the neutralisation potential. This
ability is of particular interest, as anorthite has
an about 14x higher neutralisation potential than
albite (e.g. Jambor et al., 2002).
Fig. 4: Quantitative TOPAS refinement results.
Tab. 4: Quantitative TOPAS refinement results.
Compound Name
Phase amounts
Albite
49.6%
Oligoclase
30.5%
Quartz
9.9%
Diopside
8.8%
Muscovite
1.2%
Fig. 5: Streckeisen diagram for intrusive rocks.
Q: quartz, A: alkali-feldspar, P: plagioclase.
Reference
J.L. Jambor, J.E. Dutrizac, L.A. Groat, M. Raudsepp.
Environmental Geology (2002) 43, 1-17.
Q
A
P
granite
grano-
diorite
quartz-rich
granodiorite
quartz-
syenite
quartz-
monzonite
quartz-
monzo-
diorite
quartz-
diorite
tonalite
XRD and XRF are highly complementary
materials analysis methods which, when used
together, greatly improve the accuracy of
phase identification and quantitative analysis.
The combination of both methods provides an
increase in the numbers of measured parameters,
which means that fewer assumptions are needed
for analysis. This in turn provides not only greater
accuracy of results, but also increases the range
of samples that can be measured to include
samples about which little or nothing is known in
advance.
XRD is the most direct and accurate analytical
method for determining the presence and
absolute amounts of mineral species in a sample.
Ambiguous results may be obtained however, if
the sample chemistry and/or origin are unknown.
In these cases phase identification can be difficult;
in particular, isostructural phases with similar
chemical composition will give similar powder
diffraction patterns.
In contrast to XRD, XRF provides highly accurate
information about the elemental composition
of a sample, but it cannot deliver direct phase
information. Mass-balance calculations may give
sufficient phase information in some cases, but
can also lead to meaningless results e.g. in the
presence of polymorphs.
It is the complimentary nature of the XRD and
XRFmethods which makes them a valuable
tool for quantitative phase analysis in numerous
applications ranging from scientific research
to industrial high-throughput quality control.
Particularily in mineralogical and geological
application areas, the combined use of XRD and
XRF is booming, offering completely new insights
into materials and processes. Typical examples
are the cement, minerals & mining, and industrial
minerals industries, where the quality of products
and / or efficiency of processes is governed by
both phase and elemental composition. The
combined use of XRD and XRF methods allows
the reliable analysis of materials, for which the
individual methods fail to deliver accurate and
reliable results.
Page 2
Quantitative phase and element analysis of
host/waste rocks and tailings is an important
application in the minerals and mining industry
with respect to both process optimization (e.g.
acid leaching) and environmental protection:
Mining and milling operations are responsible
for the production of billions of tonnes of waste
rock and finely crushed tailings worldwide. An
important application is the knowledge of the
relative amounts of the minerals with acid-
producing or neutralization potential for successful
acid-base accounting with respect to both the
leaching process as well as acid mine drainage,
with its detrimental effects on environment.
As an example, we report combined XRD-XRF
analysis of an intrusive rock with unknown
composition. Of particular interest was its
classification by mineral content as well as
the detection and accurate quantification of
potentially present minerals with significant acid-
producing or neutralization potential.
Powder diffraction data were recorded using a
D4 ENDEAVOR powder diffractometer equipped
with a LynxEye
TM
detector (Fig. 1); the total
measurement time required was about 5 minutes.
For phase identification and quantification,
the DIFFRAC
plus
software packages EVA,
SEARCH and TOPAS were used. Standardless
XRFmeasurements on the same sample were
performed with the S4 PIONEER and the
SPECTRA
plus
software (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1: D4 ENDEAVOR diffractometer (right)
and S4 PIONEER spectrometer (left) connected
with conveyer belt. The D4 is equipped with
Super Speed LynxEye
TM
detector.
Fig. 2: EVA phase identification results.
1) Phase identification
Fig. 2 and Tab. 1 show the XRD powder data and
the phase identification results. The major rock
forming minerals plagioclase, quartz, diopside
and muscovite are easily and correctly identified
in a single default run. Note, that the highly
sensitive SEARCH algorithm clearly prefers albite
(Na-plagioclase) versus anorthite (Ca-plagioclase)
as a result of the slightly different lattice
parameters of both plagioclase solid solution
end members. Best SEARCH figure-of-merits
obtained for the individual phases were 0.65 and
1.48, respectively. Neither ore minerals nor any
K-feldspars or feldspathoids could be detected.
Tab. 1: EVA phase identification results.
SS-VVV-PPPP
Compound Name
00-009-0466 (*)
Albite
00-041-1480 (I)
Albite, calcian
03-065-0466 (C)
Quartz low, syn
01-087-0700 (C)
Diopside, syn
01-089-5402 (C)
Muscovite 2M1
Page 3
Fig. 3: EVA combined XRD-XRF results -
comparison of calculated (column "SQD") versus
observed (column "XRF") element concentrations.
The difference is given in column "Delta".
2) Combined XRD-XRF analysis
To confirm the phase identification results,
and to obtain semi-quantitative phase amount
estimates consistent with the actual elemental
composition of the sample, combined XRD-XRF
analysis has been performed with EVA. EVA
enables semi-quantitative analysis based on the
reference-intensity-ratio (RIR) method using both
XRD as well as XRFdata simultaneously: On
scaling the maximum intensities of the ICDD PDF
patterns to the observed peaks in the powder
pattern, EVA calculates both phase and element
concentrations, and compares the latter with the
actually measured element concentrations.
Element concentrations as obtained by XRF and
used by EVA are provided in Tab. 2. Already at
first glance, the XRF data fully confirm the absence
of any significant acid-producing ore minerals
due to the minor concentrations found for heavy
elements and the absence of sulphur.
Tab. 2: Element concentrations [%] as obtained by XRF.
Oxygen
47.7
Silicon
30.0
Aluminum 9.75
Sodium
6.1
Calcium
3.66
Magnesium 0.456
Iron
1.35
Potassium
0.271
Phosphorus 0.114
Chlorine
0.0445
Titanium
0.252
Manganese 0.0173
Cobalt
0.0182
Nickel
0.0142
Strontium
0.0595
Zirconium
0.0143
Barium
0.0258
Wolfram
0.101
The results for combined XRD-XRF analysis with
EVA are shown in Fig. 3 and Tab. 3. The high Na
vs. Ca concentrations confirm the presence of Na-
plagioclase as found by XRD (diopside accounts
for about 60% of the total Ca, as calculated
by EVA). The present Na-plagioclase is most
successfully modelled using two albite phases
with different Ca amounts. Note the excellent
agreement found between the calculated and
observed element concentrations, which is better
than 1% for all elements, and therefore confirms
the correctness of the XRD phase identification
results for all phases.
The accuracy of the RIR method is limited by
several factors such as preferred orientation
effects and the quality of the ICDD PDF data used
(e.g. quality of relative intensities, I/Icor values,
idealized chemical formula).
Tab. 3: EVA semi-quantitative phase analysis
results based on combined XRD-XRF using
reference intensities as given in the ICDD PDF
patterns.
SS-VVV-PPPP
Compound Name
Phase
amounts
00-009-0466 (*)
Albite
58.2%
00-041-1480 (I)
Albite, calcian
15.4%
03-065-0466 (C) Quartz low, syn
14.0%
01-087-0700 (C) Diopside, syn
9.9%
01-089-5402 (C) Muscovite 2M1
2.6%
The most accurate quantitative results will be
obtained from a TOPAS Rietveld refinement. The
combined XRD-XRF results obtained are of high
value for defining the refinement model.
Page 4
BRUKER AXS, INC.
5465 EAST ChERYL pARKwAY
MADISON, wI 53711-5373
USA
TEL. (+1) (800) 234-XRAY
TEL. (+1) (608) 276-3000
FAX (+1) (608) 276-3006
EMAIL info@bruker-axs.com
www.bruker-axs.com
All configurations and specifications are subject to change without notice. Order No. L88-E00058. © 2006 BRUKER AXS GmbH. Printed in Germany.
BRUKER AXS GMBh
OESTLIChE RhEINBRUECKENSTR. 49
D-76187 KARLSRUhE
GERMANY
TEL. (+49) (0)(721)595-2888
FAX (+49) (0)(721)595-4587
EMAIL info@bruker-axs.de
www.bruker-axs.de
BRUKER AXS K.K
3-9-A, MORIYA, KANAGAwA
YOKOhAMA, KANAGAwA 221-0022
JApAN
TEL. (+81) 45 453 1963
FAX (+81) 45 440 0757
www.bruker-axs.com
3) Quantitative TOPAS refinement
Quantitative Rietveld analysis has been
performed using TOPAS, the results are shown
in Fig. 4 and Tab. 4. For the final refinement
two Na-plagioclases with different compositions
have been used to model the data to take the
elemental analysis results into account: Albite (0%
Ca) and Oligoclase (25% Ca).
From the results in Tab. 4 the following
conclusions can be drawn:
1. The sample can be unambiguously classified as
a quartzdiorite according to Streckeisen, see Fig. 5.
2. Combined XRD-XRF analysis and TOPAS
Rietveld refinement can allow a distinction of even
neighboring plagioclase solid solution members
(here albite and oligoclase) if present in sufficient
amounts.
The present sample can be characterised as
a rock with insignificant acid producing or
neutralisation potential. Remarkable is the easy
and reliable determination of the plagioclase type
for estimation of the neutralisation potential. This
ability is of particular interest, as anorthite has
an about 14x higher neutralisation potential than
albite (e.g. Jambor et al., 2002).
Fig. 4: Quantitative TOPAS refinement results.
Tab. 4: Quantitative TOPAS refinement results.
Compound Name
Phase amounts
Albite
49.6%
Oligoclase
30.5%
Quartz
9.9%
Diopside
8.8%
Muscovite
1.2%
Fig. 5: Streckeisen diagram for intrusive rocks.
Q: quartz, A: alkali-feldspar, P: plagioclase.
Reference
J.L. Jambor, J.E. Dutrizac, L.A. Groat, M. Raudsepp.
Environmental Geology (2002) 43, 1-17.
Q
A
P
granite
grano-
diorite
quartz-rich
granodiorite
quartz-
syenite
quartz-
monzonite
quartz-
monzo-
diorite
quartz-
diorite
tonalite
XRD- provides most direct analytical methol for determining presence and absolute amounts of minerals species in sample. XRD can also identify phases
XRF- provides direct information about chemical composition but cannot deliver direct phase information. Mass-balance calculations can be deducted but may lead to useless results in the presence of a polymorph.
Copper is often used in XRD analysis as a standard reference material or calibration standard due to its well-defined and sharp diffraction peaks. It also has a simple crystal structure which makes it easy to interpret the XRD data. Additionally, copper has good thermal and chemical stability, making it suitable for use in XRD instruments.
Glass does not exhibit distinct X-ray diffraction (XRD) peaks because it is amorphous in nature, lacking a regular crystalline structure. This is in contrast to crystalline materials, which display sharp, well-defined peaks in XRD patterns due to their ordered atomic arrangement.
The Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) in XRD increases with an increase in grain size because larger grains have more crystalline imperfections (e.g., grain boundaries, dislocations) that contribute to broadening of the diffraction peaks. As the grain size increases, these imperfections become more pronounced, leading to broader diffraction peaks and a larger FWHM.
Ionization energy in X-ray diffraction (XRD) comes from the interaction of X-rays with atoms in a crystal sample. When the X-rays strike the sample, they can displace electrons from the inner shells of atoms, leading to the ionization of the atoms. This process can result in the emission of characteristic X-ray radiation, which is used to determine the atomic structure of the sample.
Polymorphism and Allotropy are same thing. Polymorphism is used for compounds and the allotropy is reserved for elements. You can go for XRD to check the crystal structure and their composition to distinguish.
Copper is often used in XRD analysis as a standard reference material or calibration standard due to its well-defined and sharp diffraction peaks. It also has a simple crystal structure which makes it easy to interpret the XRD data. Additionally, copper has good thermal and chemical stability, making it suitable for use in XRD instruments.
Glass does not exhibit distinct X-ray diffraction (XRD) peaks because it is amorphous in nature, lacking a regular crystalline structure. This is in contrast to crystalline materials, which display sharp, well-defined peaks in XRD patterns due to their ordered atomic arrangement.
XRD stands for Extensible Resource Descriptor Sequence. It is a version of the XML format that allows users to discover various metadata aspects from documents being used.
by the use of XRD.
In the external standard method for X-ray diffraction (XRD) technique, a known standard sample is used to calibrate the XRD instrument before analyzing unknown samples. The intensity of characteristic peaks from the standard sample is measured and used to calculate the correction factor or calibration curve, which is then applied to quantify the phases in the unknown samples based on their XRD patterns.
Sharp peaks in powder XRD indicate well-ordered crystal structures with long-range periodicity. Diffuse peaks, on the other hand, suggest the presence of defects, disorders, or amorphous regions within the material. In powder XRD, the diffraction pattern results from a combination of many crystallites with different orientations, leading to a mixture of sharp and diffuse peaks.
Cobalt X-ray diffraction (XRD) is used in materials science to analyze the crystal structures of materials. It is commonly used to determine the atomic arrangement and composition of materials, as well as their physical and chemical properties. Cobalt XRD can help researchers identify phases, defects, and grain sizes in materials, providing valuable insights into their structure and behavior. Overall, cobalt XRD plays a crucial role in advancing our understanding of materials and their properties in various fields such as metallurgy, nanotechnology, and solid-state physics.
SAXS (Small-Angle X-ray Scattering) and XRD (X-ray Diffraction) are both techniques used in material analysis, but they have different purposes and applications. SAXS is used to study the structure of materials on a nanometer scale, providing information about the size, shape, and arrangement of particles in a material. It is particularly useful for analyzing disordered or amorphous materials. XRD, on the other hand, is used to determine the crystal structure of materials, providing information about the arrangement of atoms in a material's crystal lattice. It is commonly used to identify crystalline phases and study the composition of materials. In summary, SAXS is used for analyzing nanoscale structures and disordered materials, while XRD is used for studying crystal structures and crystalline materials.
XRD (X-ray diffraction) is a technique used to analyze the crystallographic structure of materials. It provides information on the crystal structure, phase composition, and crystallite size of a sample, helping to identify the different phases present in the material and their arrangement in the crystal lattice.
XRD, or X-ray diffraction, is used to analyze the crystalline structure of materials by measuring the scattering of X-rays. It can provide information on the crystal structure, atomic arrangement, and orientation of crystalline materials, making it valuable for material identification and characterization in various fields such as chemistry, physics, geology, and material science.
An XRD pole figure is a graphical representation of the orientation distribution of crystallites in a sample based on X-ray diffraction data. It provides information on the preferred orientation or texture of the crystalline material, showing how the crystals are aligned in different directions within the sample. Pole figures are useful for understanding the crystallographic orientation relationships and anisotropic properties of materials.
Actually the type of compound and its molecular structure designates which technique will be more effective. XRD is used to measure crystalline compounds and provides a quantitative and qualitative analysis of compounds that cannot be measured by other means.XRF is a technique that is used to measure the percentage of metals within inorganic matrices such as cement and metal alloys. XRF is an especially useful research and development tool in construction industries. This technique is extremely useful for determining the make-up of these materials, allowing for higher-quality cements and alloys to be developed. Disadvantage : XRD has some size limitations. It is much more accurate for measuring large crystalline structures rather than small ones. Small structures that are present only in trace amounts will often go undetected by XRD readings, which can result in skewed results.