EDS Detectors

A Cog’s Case for Corporate Utopia

David Durham, Regional Sales Manager, EDAX

Not too long ago I went to my optometrist to get an eye exam for some replacement glasses. My last pair had been stolen after my car was broken into in broad daylight during lunch at a restaurant in the Bay Area. (What the thief planned on doing with my prescription glasses is still a mystery to me.)

Figure 1: The old phoropter* (top) and the new phoropter** (bottom).

It had been at least a couple years since my last examination, but I was prepared to be guided through all the typical tests, culminating with that “giant-machine-with-multiple-lenses” pressed into my face to help the optometrist determine the prescription that would best correct the errors in my vision. I’d later learn that this machine is called a phoro-optometer, or more commonly a “phoropter.” And, contrary to my previous experiences with this instrument, it was now a super-sleek, slimmed down, digital version of the machine, using a computer controlled digital refraction system to cycle through the refraction options instead of using stacks of physical lenses that had to be manually cycled by the optometrist.

It was much smaller, quieter, faster, and easier than the version with which I was familiar. I was thoroughly impressed. But I was even more impressed when the instrument was pulled away and I saw the Ametek logo emblazoned on the side of it.

I couldn’t help but reflexively blurt out “Hey I work there!” to which the optometrist looked up from my file and began curiously interrogating me about my history in the eye care industry. Sadly, he quickly lost interest after I explained that I worked in a different division of Ametek that manufactures EDS, EBSD, and WDS systems.

After my exam, for some reason I felt a bit intimidated about not knowing more about Ametek’s business units outside of the EDAX niche to which I belong. I knew Ametek was a huge corporation, steadily growing larger over the decades — mainly by acquisition of smaller companies – but I’d never really grasped the sheer size and breadth of everything Ametek does. This wasn’t the first time I’ve been in this type of situation. Prior to joining EDAX/Ametek I worked for another scientific instrumentation corporation, slightly smaller than Ametek but still a similar type of behemoth with a wide range of companies making products that service comparable industries and applications. Even at that corporation my knowledge of the business outside of my business unit’s portfolio was very limited. These places are just so big!

Working at large corporations like these can, at times, be a little bit discouraging if you think of yourself as just a single cog in a machine with thousands of moving parts. Giant corporations certainly seem to have a bad reputation these days and I’ll admit I’ve experienced my fair share of corporation-induced angst over the years. Working within a large bureaucracy can make completing the smallest internal tasks overwhelming. Being in a smaller company that is acquired – I’ve been through two acquisitions — can be disruptive to business and cause a lot of anxiety.

But is there a good side to these mega-corporations? I think so.

I can find some important benefits that could be argued to outweigh the negative aspects, not just to the cogs like myself but also to the markets that they serve. Whether or not these apply to other more prominent mega-corporations is debatable, but I think they seem to be reasonable positive characteristics, at least from my experience in the scientific instrumentation field.

Having the brand name recognition has always been an advantage. Customers (and their procurement departments) are typically more willing to do business with companies that have a long history of manufacturing products. Being in business for multiple decades with a proven track record of having the resources to reliably deliver products to the market and consistently service its user-base generates heaps of reassurance for customers that a younger or smaller company just can’t provide. It works similarly for vendors as well – it turns out that people are always more willing to sell you stuff if they’re confident that your company will pay for it.

Being in a large corporation also offers a huge advantage in the ability to research and develop new technology and product improvements. This can come by brute force – having deeper pockets to invest more money into R&D – or even by utilizing the synergy between individual companies under the corporation’s umbrella. EDAX is a great example of this in a couple ways. Ametek’s purchase of a new business unit in 2014 facilitated the development of EDAX’s groundbreaking Octane Elite and Octane Elect EDS systems, allowing for speed and sensitivity that had never been achieved before in any other EDS system. Collaboration between EDAX and another sister company within the Materials Analysis Division of Ametek, ushered in the release of EDAX’s new Velocity highspeed CMOS EBSD camera, by far the fastest EBSD system available. Realization of these two milestones of innovation would have been significantly delayed without the help of Ametek’s resources.

Figure 2: The Octane Elite (left) and the Velocity Super (right), two of EDAX’s products that were developed, in part, with the help of other business units inside Ametek.

But what I think tends to be the best part is that, as long as a company is meeting its targets and things are humming along nicely, corporations – at least the good ones, in my opinion — are usually happy to just let the business unit do its own thing. Having an “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” mentality is the ideal way to keep the key talent happy and keep the business growing and making money. It also makes it possible to retain some semblance of the original company culture that contributed to its success in the first place. This is the holy grail for us cogs – being able to keep that small business feel while also being able to take advantage of all the big business benefits at the same time. Again, EDAX is a good example of this, with many of EDAX’s employees being legacy staff hired on long before the EDAX acquisition. This tells me Ametek must be doing something right.

So, I guess it’s debatable. While we may be willingly marching our grandchildren into a dystopia where three or four companies own all the businesses in the world, there are some undeniable advantages that working for a big company brings as well. And I take some comfort in the fact there are some very intelligent and innovative people behind the curtains, trying to do good things to make their customers happy and generally improve the lives of everyone in the world. We may or may not see all the things like the better phoropters out there, but our lives are almost certainly benefited by them whether we realize it or not.

* Photo from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoropter
** Photo from http://www.reichert.com/

A Lot of Excitement in the Air!

Sia Afshari, Global Marketing Manager, EDAX

After all these years I still get excited about new technologies and their resulting products, especially when I have had the good fortune to play a part in their development. As I look forward to 2019, there are new and exciting products on the horizon from EDAX, where the engineering teams have been hard at work innovating and enhancing capabilities across all product lines. We are on the verge of having one of our most productive years for product introduction with new technologies expanding our portfolio in electron microscopy and micro-XRF applications.

Our APEX software platform will have a new release early this year with substantial feature enhancements for EDS, to be followed by EBSD capabilities later in 2019. APEX will also expand its wings to uXRF providing a new GUI and advanced quant functions for bulk and multi-layer analysis.

Our OIM Analysis EBSD software will also see a major update with the addition of a new Dictionary Indexing option.

A new addition to our TEM line will be a 160 mm² detector in a 17.5 mm diameter module that provides an exceptional solid angle for the most demanding applications in this field.

Elite T EDS System

Velocity, EDAX’s low noise CMOS EBSD camera, provides astonishing EBSD performance at greater than 3000 fps with high indexing on a range of materials including deformed samples.

Velocity EBSD Camera

Last but not least, being an old x-ray guy, I can’t help being so impressed with the amazing EBSD patterns we are collecting from a ground-breaking direct electron detection (DED) camera with such “Clarity” and detail, promising a new frontier for EBSD applications!
It will be an exciting year at EDAX and with that, I would like to wish you all a great, prosperous year!

What an Eclipse can teach us about our EDS Detectors

Shawn Wallace, Applications Engineer, EDAX

A large portion of the US today saw a real-world teaching moment about something microanalysts think about every day.

Figure 1. Total solar eclipse.                                  Image credit-nasa.gov

With today’s Solar Eclipse, you could see two objects that have the same solid angle in the sky, assuming you are in the path of totality. Which is bigger, the Sun or the Moon? We all know that the Sun is bigger, its radius is nearly 400x that of the moon.

Figure 2. How it works.                                             Image credit – nasa.gov

Luckily for us nerds, it is also 400x further away from the Earth than the moon is. This is what makes the solid angle of both objects the same, so that from the perspective of viewers from the Earth, they take up the same area in the sphere of the sky.

The EDAX team observes the solar eclipse in NJ, without looking at the sun!

Why does all this matter for a microanalyst? We always want to get the most out of our detectors and that means maximizing the solid angle. To maximize it, you really have two parameters to play with: how big the detector is and how close the detector is to the sample. ‘How big is the detector’ is easy to play with. Bigger is better, right? Not always, as the bigger it gets, the more you start running in to challenges with pushing charge around that can lead to issues like incomplete charge collection, ballistic deficits, and other problems that many people never think about.

All these factors tend to lead to lower resolution spectra and worse performance at fast pulse processing times.
What about getting closer? Often, we aim for a take-off angle of 350 and want to ensure that the detector does not protrude below the pole piece to avoid hitting the sample. On different microscopes, this can put severe restrictions on how and where the detector can be mounted and we can end up with the situation where we need to move a large detector further back to make it fit within the constraining parameters. So, getting closer isn’t always an option and sometimes going bigger means moving further back.

Figure 3. Schematic showing different detector sizes with the same solid angle. The detector size can govern the distance from the sample.

In the end, bigger is not always better. When looking at EDS systems, you have to compare the geometry just as much as anything else. The events happening today remind of us that. Sure the Sun is bigger than Moon, but the latter does just as good a job of making a part of the sky dark as the Sun does making it bright.

For more information on optimizing your analysis with EDS and EBSD, see our webinar, ‘Why Microanalysis Performance Matters’.

Celebrating the 50th Birthday of Microanalysis

Sia Afshari, Global Marketing Manager, EDAX

The Microscopy & Microanalysis (M&M) Conference is celebrating 50 years of microanalysis at this year’s meeting in St. Louis next week. There is an entire session (A18.3) dedicated to the 50-year anniversary and the historical background of microanalysis from several different perspectives.

My colleague, Dr. Patrick Camus will be presenting the history of EDAX in his presentation, “More than 50 Years of Influence on Microanalysis” at this session and this is a must see for everyone who is at all interested in the historical development and advances in microanalysis!

Looking back at some of the images in the field of microscopy and seeing how far we have come from static spectrum collection to the standardless quantification of complex materials makes me wonder (in a good way!), about the future and especially about the technical possibilities in microanalysis.

Figure 1. Nuclear Diodes EDAX System Interfaced to Cambridge Stereoscan Scanning Electron Microscope – circa 1968

Pat will be describing the evolution of the company from Nuclear Diodes (1962) through EDAX International (1972) and purchase by Philips (1974) to acquisition by Ametek in 2001. Many accomplished microanalysts have been part of the EDAX team along the journey and have contributed enormously to the technical development of microanalysis. The advancements which have been made to date and those which will continue in the future would have not been possible without the dedication and hard work of all these pioneers in this field.

Figure 2. EDAX Element Silicon Drift Detector on a Scanning Electron Microscope – 2017.

At EDAX, which happens to be older than 50 years, I have been honored to meet some of the pioneers of microanalysis. I extend my gratitude to all those whose work has made it possible for us to enjoy the level of sophistication achieved today and we hope to continue their innovative tradition!

Please click here for more information on EDAX at M&M 2017.

Caveat Emptor – Especially with Microanalysis Samples

Matt Nowell – EBSD Product Manager, EDAX

My wife tells me I’m a bit of a hoarder. As we have done our spring cleaning, I’ve found coasters of places I’ve dined around the world, shirts a size (or more) smaller that I haven’t worn in years, and 2 Lego minifigures I bought and forgot to give to the kids. I’ve been forced to admit I didn’t need to keep all this any longer. Of course, as someone who develops and demonstrates EDS and EBSD microanalysis tools, the one thing you can never have too much of is interesting samples. I have drawers full of samples I’ve analyzed, or hope to analyze, and they come in handy when someone wants an interesting example for a customer or presentation.

With that in mind, I’d like to describe my adventures with a new sample I obtained this year. I found a bracelet online that claimed to have 62 elements. To me, that seemed wonderful, and potentially a great sample for EDS and EBSD analysis. I ordered one, and anxiously awaited its delivery.

When it arrived, and I opened it, I immediately became a bit suspicious. For the size and volume of material, it felt very light. I have a set of metal coupons that are all the same size but different alloys and materials, and there is a significant different in feel between different alloys. I guessed it was aluminum, but would use EDS and EBSD to determine the composition.

It was an interesting characterization problem though – potentially it contained 62 elements, but I didn’t know the concentration or spatial distribution of these elements. I started with EDS, and used my Octane Elite EDS detector. Initially I set up the SEM for 20kV analysis, with ≈15kcps output through the detector with ≈ 30% deadtime. Under these conditions, the resolution of the EDS detector was 122.8eV. I imaged a 600µm x 800µm area of the bracelet, and collected EDS spectra for 1, 10, 100, 1000, and 10,000 seconds. The signal to background increases as the square of the time collected, so for each 10X increase, I expected to improve the detection by about a factor of 3.

Figure 1. EDS Spectra collected for 10,000 Live Seconds

Figure 1 shows the EDS spectra collected for 10,000 live seconds. With careful review and analysis, I was able to identify 22 of the possible 62 claimed elements. Aluminum had the largest peak, and had the highest concentration. Of course, I knew I was only sampling the surface, and made no attempt to section into the sample. There was also a strong oxygen peak, which I would attribute to an oxidation layer. Most other detectable elements were present in smaller concentrations. Figures 2 and 3 show an energy range between 7.75eV – 9.00 eV, where the k-line peaks for nickel, zinc, and copper are present, for 10 and 10,000 live seconds of collection. These elements were selected because they were present in low concentrations. At 10 live seconds, these peaks are very noisy but present, and additional collection time significantly improves their distribution shape and counting statistics.

Figure 2. EDS Spectra collected for 10 Live seconds with 15kcsp output

Figure 3. EDS Spectra collected for 10,000 Live Seconds with 15kcsp output

Knowing that better counting improves lower limits of detection, I increased the beam current on the SEM to obtain ≈215kcps output counts, and then collected spectra over the same time intervals.* Figure 4 shows the collection under these conditions after 10,000 live seconds. I should note that while I analyzed the same size area, I did not analyze the exact same area, so it is possible any variations could be due to this approach.

Figure 4. EDS Spectra collected for 10,000 Live Seconds with 215kcps output

At this point, I had a lot of data, but increasing the count rate did not reveal any more elements than were initially detected. To evaluate performance, I quantified each spectra, and focused my analysis on the nickel, zinc, and copper elements. The weight percentage of each of these elements is shown in Figure 5 for each collection time and count rate. Each element has the same color (blue for Nickel, red for Zinc, and black for Copper), the lower count rate lines have a marker, while the higher count rate lines do not.

Figure 5. Weight percentage of selected elements as a function of acquisition time and output count rate

To me, this data was very impressive. Except for the 1 and 10 live second collections at the lower output count rate, the consistency of the data was good, even with concentrations of less than 1 weight percentage. The quantification output does give an error percentage value, and rule-of-thumb acceptance criteria was met after 100 live seconds collection at the lower count rate and 10 live seconds collection at the higher count rate. The fact that I continued to collect data for significantly longer times past this point would suggest that the remaining elements are either not-present, not at the surface where I am analyzing, or are present at concentrations lower than my detection limits.

I also wanted to look at this sample structurally, hoping for an interesting multiphase sample with pretty microstructures I could hang in the hall. I sectioned the sample, and polished a portion for EBSD analysis. The PRIAS + IPF Orientation map is shown in figure 6. I was able to index 99.7% of the collected points with high confidence using the aluminum FCC material file. It has a very large grain structure. I did see a number of smaller Fe precipitates, but I have not examined at higher magnification yet.

Figure 6. PRIAS + IPF Orientation map .

All in all, it didn’t turn out to be the sample I had hoped for, but was good to help think about collecting EDS data for both accuracy and sensitivity. I’ll have to share the sample with other colleagues for WDS and µXRF analysis to see if we can find more of these missing elements.

For more information on quantative analysis with EDS, join our upcoming webinar, ‘Practical Quantitative Analysis – How to optimize the accuracy of your data’. Please click here to register.

Considerations for your New Year’s Resolutions from Dr. Pat

Dr. Patrick Camus, Director of Research and Innovation, EDAX

The beginning of the new calendar year is a time to reflect and evaluate important items in your life. At work, it might also be a time to evaluate the age and capabilities of the technical equipment in your lab. If you are a lucky employee, you may work in a newly refurbished lab where most of your equipment is less than 3 years old. If you are such a fortunate worker, the other colleagues in the field will be envious. They usually have equipment that is much more than 5 years old, some of it possibly dating from the last century!

Old Jalopy circa 1970 EDAX windowless Si(Li) detector circa early 70’s

In my case, at home my phone is 3 years old and my 3 vehicles are 18, 16, and 3 years old. We are definitely evaluating the household budget this year to upgrade the oldest automobile. We need to decide what are the highest priority items and which are not so important for our usage. It’s often important to sort through the different features offered and decide what’s most relevant … whether that’s at home or in the lab.

Octane Elite Silicon Drift Detector 2017 Dr. Pat’s Possible New Vehicle 2017

If your lab equipment is older than your vehicles, you need to determine whether the latest generation of equipment will improve either your throughput or the quality of your work. The latest generations of EDAX equipment can enormously speed up throughput and the improve quality of your analysis over that of previous generations – it’s just a matter of convincing your boss that this has value for the company. There is no time like the present for you to gather your arguments into a proposal to get the budget for the new generation of equipment that will benefit both you and the company.
Best of luck in the new year!

Adding a New Dimension to Analysis

Dr. Oleg Lourie, Regional Manager A/P, EDAX

With every dimension, we add to the volume of data, we believe that we add a new perspective in our understanding and interpretation of the data. In microanalysis adding space or time dimensionality has led to the development of 3D compositional tomography and dynamic or in situ compositional experiments. 3D compositional tomography or 3D EDS is developing rapidly and getting wider acceptance, although it still presents challenges such as the photon absorption, associated with sample thickness and time consuming acquisition process, which requires a high level of stability, especially for TEM microscopes. After setting up a multi hour experiment in a TEM to gain a 3D compositional EDS map, one may wonder Is there any shortcut to getting a ‘quick’ glimpse into 3-dimensional elemental distribution? The good news is that there is one and compared to tilt series tomography, it can be a ‘snapshot’ type of the 3D EDS map.

3D distribution of Nd in steel.

To enable such 3D EDS mapping on the conceptual level we would need at least two identical 2D TEM EDS maps acquired with photons having different energy – so you can slide along the energy axis (adding a new dimension?) and use photon absorption as a natural yardstick to probe the element distribution along the X-ray path. Since the characteristic X-rays have discrete energies (K, L, M lines), it might work if you subtract the K line map from the L line or M line map to see an element distribution based on different absorption between K and L or M line maps. Ideally, one of EDS maps should be acquired with high energy X-rays, such as K lines for high atomic number elements, and another with low energy X-rays where the absorption has a significant effect, such as for example M lines. Indeed, in the case of elements with a high atomic number, the energies for K lines area ranged in tens of keV having virtually 0 absorption even in a thick TEM sample.

So, it all looks quite promising except for one important detail – current SDDs have the absorption efficiency for high energy photons close to actual 0. Even if you made your SDD sensor as large 150 mm2 it would still be 0. Increasing it to 200 mm2 would keep it steady close to 0. So, having a large silicon sensor for EDS does not seem to matter, what matters is the absorption properties of the sensor material. Here we add a material selection dimension to generate a new perspective for 3D EDS. And indeed, when we selected a CdTe EDS sensor we would able to acquire X-rays with the energies up to 100 keV or more.

To summarize, using a CdTe sensor will open an opportunity for a ‘snapshot’ 3D EDS technique, which can add more insight about elemental volume distribution, sample topography and will not be limited by a sample thickness. It would clearly be more practical for elements with high atomic numbers. Although it might be utilized for a wide yet selected range of samples, this concept could be a complementary and fast (!) alternative to 3D EDS tomography.

“It’s not the size of the dog in the fight, it’s the size of the fight in the dog.” (Mark Twain)

Dr. Oleg Lourie, Senior Product Manager, EDAX

Many of us like to travel and some people are fascinated by the view of gigantic A380’ planes slowly navigating on tarmac with projected gracious and powerful determination. I too could not overcome a feel of fascination every time I observed these magnificent planes, they are really – literally big..  The airline industry however seems to have a more practical perspective on this matter – the volume of the A380s purchase is on decline and according to the recent reports Airbus is considering reducing their production based on growing preference towards smaller and faster airplanes. Although the connection may seem slightly tenuous,  in my mind I see a fairly close analogy to this situation in EDS market, when the discussion comes to the size of EDS sensors.

In modern microanalysis where the studies of a compositional structure rapidly become dependent on a time scale, the use of the large sensors can no longer be a single solution to optimize the signal. The energy resolution of an EDS spectrometer can be related to its signal detection capability, which determines the signal to noise ratio and as a result the energy resolution of the detector. Fundamentally, to increase signal to noise ratio one may choose to increase signal, or number of counts, or as alternative to reduce the noise of the detector electronics and improve its sensitivity. The first methodology, based on larger number of counts, is directly related to the amount of input X-rays determined by a solid angle of the detector, and/or the acquisition time. A good example for this approach would be a large SDD sensor operating at long shaping times. A conceptually alternative methodology, would be to employ a sensor with a) reduced electronics noise; and b) having higher efficiency in X-ray transmission, which implies less X-ray losses in transit from sample to the recorded signal in the spectra.

Using this methodology signal to noise ratio can be increased with a smaller sensor having higher transmissivity and operating at higher count rates vs larger sensor operating at lower count rates.

To understand the advantage of using a small sensor at higher count rates we can review a simple operation model for SDD.  A time for a drift of the charge generated by X-ray in Si body of the sensor can be modeled either based on a simple linear trajectory or a random walk model. In both cases, we would arrive to approximate l~√t dependence, where l is the distance traveled by charge from cathode to anode and t is the drift time. In regard to the sensor size this means that a time to collect charge from a single X-ray event is proportional to the sensor area. As an example, a simple calculation with assumed electron mobility of 1500 cm2/V-1s and bias 200 V results in 1 µs drift time estimate for 100 mm2 and 100 ns drift time for 10 mm2 sensors. This implies that in order to collect a full charge in a large sensor the rise time for preamplifier needs to be in the range of 1 µs vs 100 ns rise time that can be used with 10 mm2 sensor.  With 10 times higher readout frequency for 10 mm2 sensor it will collect equivalent signal to a 100 mm2 sensor.

What will happen if we run a large sensor at the high count rates? Let’s assume that a 100mm2 sensor in this example can utilize the 100 ns rise time. In this case, since the rise time is much shorter than the charge drift time (~1 µs), not all electrons, produced by an X-ray event, will be collected. This shortage will result in an incomplete charge collection effect (ICC), which will be introducing artifacts and deteriorating the energy resolution. A single characteristic X-ray for Cu (L) and Cu Kα will generate around 245 and 2115 electrons respectively in Si, which will drift to anode, forced by applied bias, in quite large electron packets.  Such large electron packets are rapidly expanding during the drift with ultimately linear expansion rate vs drift time. If the rise time used to collect the electron packet is too short, some of the electrons in the packet will be ‘left out’ which will result in less accurate charge counting and consequently less accurate readout of the X-ray energy. This artifact, called a ‘ballistic deficit’ (BD), will be negatively affecting the energy resolution at high count rates. It is important to note that both ICC and BD effects for the large sensors are getting more enhanced with increasing energy of the characteristic X-rays, which means the resolution stability will deteriorate even more rapidly for higher Z elements compare to the low energy/light elements range.

Figure 1: Comparative Resolution at MnKα (eV) *

As the factual illustration to this topic, the actual SDD performance for sensors with different areas is shown in the Fig. 1. It displays the effect of the acquisition rates on the energy resolution for the EDS detectors having different sensors size and electronics design. Two clear trends can be observed – a rapid energy resolution deterioration with increase of the sensor size for the traditional electronics design; and much more stable resolution performance at high count rates for the sensor with new CMOS based electronics. In particular, the data for Elite Plus with 30 mm2 sensor shows stable resolution below 0.96 µs shaping time, which corresponds to >200 kcps OCR.

In conclusion, conceptually, employing a smaller sensor with optimized signal collection efficiency at higher count rates does offer an attractive alternative to acquiring the X-ray signal matching the one from large area sensors, yet combined with high throughput and improved energy resolution. Ultimately, the ideal solution for low flux applications will be a combination of several smaller sensors arranged in an array, which will combine all the benefits of smaller geometry, higher count rates, higher transmissivity and maximized solid angle.

* SDD performance data courtesy of the EDAX Applications Team.

Return Ticket from the East Coast to East Asia

Dr. Jens Rafaelsen, Applications Engineer, EDAX

As I write this I am on my way back to the US after having spent the past week in Singapore with my schedule filled with meetings and training sessions with both local microscope vendors and for customers, and discussions with the EDAX sales and applications people from China, India and Singapore. A good amount of time was spent discussing detector specifics and how to really make the advantages of our silicon nitride window and Elite detectors shine, but there was also general knowledge transfer and comparison between the challenges that we see in the different regions.

Singapore is definitely a change from the east coast of the United States, with the tropical climate and architecture including a sky-rise hotel with a ship parked on top, buildings with the exterior designed to look like the shell of the Durian fruit, or giant steel tree structures in the middle of the city park. But it is also a central hub where we have one of our regional offices and a state that invests heavily in the knowledge industry.

While the primary reason for my trip was the training of our local team and introduction of new and up-coming projects and software features, I also wanted to gather input and knowledge to bring back to our main office in Mahwah. Often we get so used to what we see every day that we forget that there’s a whole world out there. What we in the US think should be the major focus can be of less interest in other regions and vice versa. One of the things I learned was that the Asia/Pacific region sees a larger proportion of operators being technicians with limited insight into the advantages and limitations of the technique, than we usually do in the US and Europe. At the same time the microscope vendors were impressed with the level of analysis and how powerful the TEAM software is. These are things that we will have to take into consideration for future development, making it easier for novice users to apply the flexibility and power of the software but still allowing our advanced users access to all the bells and whistles that we have to offer.

Although we have conference systems, phone meetings and e-mail, there’s definitely something to be said for meeting face to face. The discussions and interactions flow much more easily when we can actually point to the same thing on the screen, draw on a piece of paper or just chat over coffee. Of course it can be a little overwhelming to come back to the hotel after a long day and find an overflowing inbox when you open the computer (not to mention getting calls at 3 AM from people who aren’t aware that you are travelling), but this is easily compensated by the experience of the culture, local food, and the chance to catch up with colleagues. Who knew that fried fish skin with salted egg goes so well with a cold beer?

With my Singapore trip over, I am making my way through the 24-hour travel back to the US and I have time to contemplate the experiences and discussions that I have had during the past week. There’s plenty of data to analyze, ideas for new software features, and input from microscope vendors to consider, but all that will have to wait. For now, it’s time to catch some sleep, try to get back on east coast time and maybe not worry about the line at immigration and New York traffic till I actually have to deal with it!

The origin of ideas

Dr. Patrick Camus, Director of Research and Innovation, EDAX

Stimulation for new research approaches and topics can come from odd origins and at the most unexpected times.

We recently held a Sales Meeting at the factory in Mahwah. During a presentation by Dr. Jens Rafaelsen, an Applications Scientist, he mentioned an unexpected EDS result. He found that a brand new EDS Elite detector was collecting more x-rays than a larger older Octane detector for the same geometry and SEM conditions. This result is quite unexpected and seems to violate physics and our typical ideas about x-ray detection. If confirmed, this result has far reaching implications for Sales and Marketing and would be exploited in the coming months. But the science behind the result is unknown at the time.

EDS spectrum and modelling of Mg-Calcite.

A further discussion with Jens after his presentation inspired me to draft some notes on the scrap of paper that I had on hand. From these notes, I drafted an approach to an x-ray detection modelling experiment that would require input from Jens and another Scientist within the company. The experiment is to go beyond the simple description of associating detector detection performance with simply solid angle. That method may work when much of the sub-assemblies of the detection system are similar. However, for the latest generation of EDS detection systems, the use of modern materials requires a more complete system analysis.

Together, we will refine the model, compare the results to empirical results, and hope to publish both internal and external publications.

All of this work was sparked by a subtle but original observation by a coworker. Inspiration can come from unexpected sources and at unexpected times. Where have your inspirations come from?

Click here to watch Global Applications Manager, Tara Nylese presenting an overview of the Octane Elite at M&M 2015.

BLOG UPDATE FROM PAT – March 23, 2016
A new result has been found while modelling different detector configurations. The thickness of the Silicon support grid for the windows is significantly different for the traditional polymer (>300 um) and the new Si-N (<50 um) windows. This creates a different absorption of x-rays as a function of x-ray energy. This is illustrated in the following figure.

The predicted increase of the transparency of the Si-N window grid at intermediate x-ray energies has the potential to increase the total count rates of the detection system by a significant amount. More details to follow.