Rutherford Backscattering Spectroscopy, Counting Statistics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on analyzing a Rutherford Backscattering Spectroscopy (RBS) spectrum of a AuAgCu alloy on a glass substrate. The participant successfully calculated the yields for Au, Ag, and Cu, resulting in a stoichiometry of Au0.37Ag0.16Cu0.47. To determine the accuracy of these results, the participant inquired about the proper method for propagating uncertainties, specifically whether to add total counts with uncertainties or to propagate errors on the ratios before calculating stoichiometries. A key insight provided is that individual uncertainties can be derived from the square root of counts for each element, with additional considerations for the combined uncertainties of the other elements.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Rutherford Backscattering Spectroscopy (RBS)
  • Familiarity with counting statistics in Ion Beam Analysis (IBA)
  • Knowledge of error propagation techniques
  • Basic chemistry concepts related to atomic masses and stoichiometry
NEXT STEPS
  • Study "Rutherford Backscattering Spectroscopy: Principles and Applications" for in-depth RBS methodologies
  • Learn about "Error Propagation in Measurements" to accurately assess uncertainties
  • Research "Counting Statistics in Ion Beam Analysis" for advanced statistical methods
  • Explore "Mass Spectrometry Basics" to understand atomic mass implications in spectroscopy
USEFUL FOR

Chemists, materials scientists, and researchers involved in surface analysis and compositional studies using Rutherford Backscattering Spectroscopy.

Dan Zar
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am given a numerical example (to be solved with pen, paper and calculator only) of an RBS spectrum of a AuAgCu-alloy on a glass-substrate. The question is "Can you get the composition? How accurate is the result?

Homework Equations


All the Rutherford Backscattering Spectroscopy equations should be easy for an expert in the field. Z Au= 79, Z Ag = 47, Z Cu = 29. Yield = Area under the peak, Au/Ag=(Yield Au/ Yield Ag)*(charge Ag^2/charge Au^2), etc. Uncertainty of Yield = square root of the area.

The Attempt at a Solution


I am able to get the yields (total areas) by calibrating the areas; I get the following numbers for the relative areas --> Au: 8371, Ag: 1262, Cu: 1427, which end up getting me to the following stoichiometry: Au0.37Ag0.16Cu0.47. Then I believe the square root of the total number of counts (or yield) is the uncertainty of each peak, so how do I know how accurate the result as a whole is? do I add up the total number of counts with the uncertainties (propagate the error) and then whatever percentage of my total number of counts corresponds to the added uncertainties is the accuracy of the result? or, do I have to propagate the error on the ratios even before I get the stoichiometries, which would require a bit of partial differentiation. I am honestly not able to solve problems about counting statistics in Ion Beam Analysis methods, if you can link me to a good text-book like approach of counting statistics in IBA methods I would appreciate it. P.S I am a chemist, be nice :)
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    88 KB · Views: 637
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you mark the problem as solved on purpose?

The different mass fractions are not independent. If you want individual uncertainties (let's take Au), you can take the square root of Au counts as uncertainty in the numerator and the uncertainty on the sum of Ag+Cu (added in quadrature, but not including the uncertainty on Au) as uncertainty in the denominator. All multiplied with the masses of the atoms of course, if you want mass fractions.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K