Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T11:30:42.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A comparative study of Cu–Ni Alloy using LIBS, LA-TOF, EDX, and XRF

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2016

N. Ahmed
Affiliation:
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-i-Azam University Campus, 45320 Islamabad, Pakistan Department of Physics, University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Muzaffarabad, Azad Kashmir, Pakistan
R. Ahmed
Affiliation:
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-i-Azam University Campus, 45320 Islamabad, Pakistan
M. Rafiqe
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Muzaffarabad, Azad Kashmir, Pakistan
M.A. Baig*
Affiliation:
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-i-Azam University Campus, 45320 Islamabad, Pakistan
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: M.A. Baig, National Centre for Physics, Quaid-i-Azam University Campus, 45320 Islamabad, Pakistan. E-mail: baig@qau.edu.pk; baig77@gmail.com

Abstract

LASER induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) has been used for the quantitative analysis of Cu–Ni alloy of known composition (75% Cu, 25% Ni) using the one line calibration free-LIBS (OLCF-LIBS), self-calibration-LIBS (SC-LIBS), calibration free LIBS (CF-LIBS), time of flight-mass spectroscopy (TOF-MS), energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF). For the LIBS-based studies, the plasma was generated by focusing the beam of a Q-switched Nd:YAG laser (532 nm, pulse energy about 200 mJ, 5 ns pulse duration) while the sample was placed in air at an atmospheric pressure. Plasma temperature about (9500 ± 300) K was calculated by the Boltzmann plot method using the neutral lines of Cu and Ni whereas the electron number density was calculated (2.0 ± 0.5) × 1016 cm−3 from the Stark broadening of an isolated Cu line as well as using the relative intensities of the neutral and singly ionized optically thin lines in the Saha–Boltzmann equation. The elemental compositions determined by different LIBS methods and standard techniques are; OLCF-LIBS (69% Cu and 31% Ni), SC-LIBS (72% Cu and 28% Ni), CF-LIBS (74% Cu and 26% Ni), TOF (74% Cu and 26% Ni), EDX (75% Cu and 24.5% Ni), XRF (73% Cu and 24.7% Ni), and LA-TOF (74% Cu and 26% Ni). It is demonstrated that the CF-LIBS method gives compositions comparable with that determined by LA-TOF, EDX, or XRF, which is also in agreement with the certified reported composition.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Optical emission spectrum of the laser produced Cu–Ni alloy plasma covering the spectral region 295–307 nm. The spectral lines of Cu I and Ni I are assigned in the blue and red color, respectively.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Optical emission spectrum of the laser produced Cu–Ni alloy plasma covering the spectral region 350–475 nm. The spectral lines of CuI, II and NiI, Ni II are assigned in blue and red color, respectively.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Optical emission spectrum of the laser produced Cu–Ni alloy plasma covering the spectral region 506–579 nm. All the lines belong to neutral copper.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Typical Boltzmann plots for estimating the plasma temperature. Emission lines from singly ionized Cu and Ni are used for obtaining temperature.

Figure 4

Table 1. Spectroscopic parameters of the emission lines of copper and nickel (NIST data base) to construct the Boltzmann plot.

Figure 5

Fig. 5. Stark broadened line profile of copper line at 510.55 nm along with the Voigt fit.

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Time of flight mass spectrum of the Cu–Ni alloy.

Figure 7

Table 2. Quantitative calculation by self-calibration method.

Figure 8

Table 3. The density ratio (ncuI/nNiII) for the calibration free quantitative analysis.

Figure 9

Table 4. Comparison of the experimentally and theoretically values derived at 0.82 eV plasma temperature.

Figure 10

Fig. 7. Energy dispersive X-ray spectrum of the Cu–Ni alloy.

Figure 11

Table 5. Comparison of elemental compositions determined by different techniques.

Figure 12

Fig. 8. Histogram across different techniques versus composition of Cu–Ni alloy.