Skip to main content
Sandbox Physics

IN27 · Count what escapes

X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer

Why does a stronger elemental line not always mean more of that element? A stronger line can come from more atoms, more effective excitation or less absorption before the photons reach the detector. Thin samples can be compared with known standards. Thicker samples need a correction that depends on composition, thickness and viewing geometry.

Excite an iron–copper sample with photons, retain spectra and standards, and compare thin-sample calibration with conditional absorption corrections.

Interactive modelX-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer

A retained detector spectrum

Raw references, checks and retained records
Withheld energy-reference error δE/eV\delta E/\mathrm{eV}00
Calibrated Gaussian FWHM ΔE/eV\Delta E/\mathrm{eV}00
Conditional profile residual χ2/ν\chi^2/\nu00
Withheld energy peak counts NE,checkN_{E,\mathrm{check}}00
Withheld energy shape residual χE2/νE\chi^2_E/\nu_E00
Mixed-check spectral residual χmix2/νmix\chi^2_{\mathrm{mix}}/\nu_{\mathrm{mix}}00
Normalized spectral condition κ\kappa00
Raw counted acquisitions in the calibration and sample
AcquisitionSpectrum countsEntrance monitorSeed
Immutable retained spectra
RecordCalibrationSupported

Two monochromatic line references calibrate the energy axis and width; a third is withheld. Pure iron and copper standards determine sensitivities. A mixed standard is an independent check. All have separate noise streams. CSV and JSON retain their definitions, full counted spectra, dark, blank, hardware, units and seeds, plus the declared sample assumptions; either file can replay the inverse without generator truth.

Uncertainty is a local, diagonal counting approximation conditional on exact standards, energy calibration, areal density and matrix. Shared-background correlations, parameter/model uncertainty and secondary fluorescence are omitted. A passing check does not validate an unknown matrix.

Physics tutorial

Which photons can leave the sample?

BackgroundAn incident X-ray can remove an inner electron. When another electron fills the vacancy, the atom may emit a characteristic X-ray. Only some emitted photons escape the sample and reach the collector.

Why it mattersElemental abundance affects a peak area, but excitation energy, layer thickness and absorption by other elements also change it.

Start with the essentials

Focus question
Why does a stronger elemental line not always mean more of that element?
One-sentence intuition
Separate the chance of creating a K-shell vacancy from the loss of incident and fluorescent photons, then compare counted spectra with known standards.

Core mathematical model

Primary fluorescent photons collected per entrance photon

Pj=Ω4πηjωKbj∑sfswτK(Es)sin⁡α1−e−AsjTAsjP_j=\frac{\Omega}{4\pi}\eta_j\omega_K b_j\sum_s f_s\frac{w\tau_K(E_s)}{\sin\alpha}\frac{1-e^{-A_{sj}T}}{A_{sj}}

The detector subtends Ω\Omega and has full-energy efficiency ηj\eta_j. The fluorescence yield and branching fraction are ωK\omega_K and bjb_j. Source weights fsf_s sum to one; ww is the emitting element mass fraction. The K-shell photoionization coefficient τK\tau_K is distinct from total attenuation. Normal areal density TT uses grams per square centimetre.

The two absorption paths

Asj=μmix(Es)sin⁡α+μmix(Ej)sin⁡βA_{sj}=\frac{\mu_{\mathrm{mix}}(E_s)}{\sin\alpha}+\frac{\mu_{\mathrm{mix}}(E_j)}{\sin\beta}

Both angles are measured above the illuminated surface. Total mixture attenuation μmix\mu_{\mathrm{mix}} includes loss by photoelectric absorption and scattering. Incident energy is EsE_s; fluorescent group energy is EjE_j.

Common difficulties

A line energy is not its absorption edge

Typical misconceptionPhotons at the copper line energy should excite copper K fluorescence.

Better mental modelRemoving a K electron needs the higher K-shell binding energy. A fluorescent photon carries a smaller energy difference between two occupied shells.

A good standard cannot reveal every matrix

Typical misconceptionPassing a mixed-standard check proves the unknown sample has the assumed thickness and composition.

Better mental modelThe check tests the stated reference conditions. Different unknown thicknesses or matrices can still change absorption; those require independent information.

Run the experiment

  1. 01

    Start with a thin alloy

    Change actual copper fraction, save a spectrum and compare thin calibration with the conditional estimate.

    What to observe: The two estimates remain close for weak absorption. Their input is the retained peak area, not the actual-composition control.
  2. 02

    Cross an absorption edge

    Choose the below-edge preset, then the hard-tail preset.

    What to observe: Eight-keV photons can create iron K vacancies but cannot create copper K vacancies. An eighteen-keV component restores copper excitation.
  3. 03

    Add material below the surface

    Choose self-absorption, compare both estimates, then change the declared areal density separately.

    What to observe: Fluorescence from greater depth is progressively lost. The thin estimate shifts; the corrected result needs the declared thickness.
  4. 04

    Change the view or the matrix

    Drag the collector and acquire new standards. Try the light-matrix preset; declare its Al fraction as 0.65 in the advanced controls.

    What to observe: Old geometry fails compatibility. The wrong matrix fails the profile test; supplying the known matrix can recover a conditional result.

Related experiments and articles

How physics instruments measure · Reading path

How physics instruments measure

Articles on this path that use this experiment, followed by the other experiments they suggest.

  1. ArticleWhy X-ray fluorescence depends on sample thickness
FeedbackSomething broken, confusing, or missing on this page?Tell us
What kind of feedback?

Sent with this page’s address, its Lab ID, the site language and your device type. Please leave out personal details. Feedback is kept for up to 12 months.Privacy policy