Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
LIBS compared with conventional plasma optical emission techniques for the analysis of metals – A review of applications and analytical performance
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, Swerea, Swerea KIMAB.
2017 (English)In: Spectrochimica Acta Part B - Atomic Spectroscopy, ISSN 0584-8547, E-ISSN 1873-3565, Vol. 134, p. 123-132Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This review is focused on a comparison of LIBS with the two most common plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (OES) techniques for analysis of metals; spark OES and glow discharge (GD) OES. It is shown that these two techniques have only minor differences in analytical performance. An important part of the paper reviews a direct comparison of the analytical figures of merit for bulk analysis of steels using spark and LIBS sources. The comparison was carried out using one instrument with interchangeable sources, eliminating differences related to the optical system and detectors. It was found that the spark provides slightly better analytical figures of merit. The spark analysis is considerably faster, the simple design of the spark stand has enabled complete automation, both properties of great importance in the metallurgical industry for routine analysis. The analysis of non-metallic inclusions (NMI) with spark and LIBS is presented, in the case of the spark this has become known as Pulse Distribution Analysis (PDA). A very significant difference between the techniques is that the electrical spark typically evaporates ~ 100 times more material than a single laser pulse, resulting in complete evaporation of an NMI present in the evaporated metal. The major advantage of LIBS is that it is localised with very good lateral resolution. The major advantages of spark is that it is much faster (can be done simultaneous with the bulk analysis) and easier to quantify. Compositional Depth Profiling (CDP) is compared for GD-OES and LIBS. It is shown that for applications where GD-OES is well suited, e.g. coated metallic sheet, GD-OES still performs slightly better than LIBS. Similar to the case of NMI analysis, the major advantage of LIBS is the great lateral resolution. This allows elemental surface mapping, as well as CDP of very small areas on μm scale. One further advantage of LIBS is that samples of almost any material, shape and size can be analysed, whereas GD-OES has only limited capabilities for non-flat and small samples. A general conclusion of this review is that LIBS is not likely to replace spark and GD-OES in the foreseeable future, for applications where these techniques are well suited. On the other hand several new applications, particularly in the field of on-line monitoring of industrial processes, are making great inroads for LIBS in the metallurgical and manufacturing industries.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. Vol. 134, p. 123-132
Keywords [en]
Depth profiling, Electric discharges, Glow discharges, Light emission, Metallurgy, Metals, Optical emission spectroscopy, Optical systems, Analytical performance, Compositional depth profiling, Industrial processs, Manufacturing industries, Metallurgical industry, Non-metallic inclusions, Plasma optical emission spectroscopy, Pulse distributions, Metal analysis
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-30823DOI: 10.1016/j.sab.2017.05.006Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85021092693OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-30823DiVA, id: diva2:1138734
Available from: 2017-09-06 Created: 2017-09-06 Last updated: 2017-09-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus
By organisation
Swerea KIMAB
In the same journal
Spectrochimica Acta Part B - Atomic Spectroscopy
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 23 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.35.2