Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T10:39:45.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

ISO 9516-1 simplified borate fusion/WDXRF analytical method for iron ore including total iron analysis: Part 2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2014

Mathieu Bouchard*
Affiliation:
Corporation Scientifique Claisse, Québec, QC, Canada
Alex Milliard
Affiliation:
Corporation Scientifique Claisse, Québec, QC, Canada
Sebastien Rivard
Affiliation:
Corporation Scientifique Claisse, Québec, QC, Canada
Sharon Ness
Affiliation:
Intertek Genalysis, Perth, Australia
*
a)Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: mbouchard@claisse.com

Abstract

A very efficient analytical method using an automated fusion machine as sample preparation tool and a wavelength-dispersive X-ray fluorescence (WDXRF) spectrometer for the determination of all the elements of interest for the iron ore industry has been optimized from the ISO 9516-1 standard method. This updated method allows for the simplification of both laboratory and spectrometry processes and so, in comparison with the original International Organization for Standardization (ISO) method, becomes less restrictive in practice. This method was used to prepare a large variety of iron ores and exploration samples from all over the world. Results of the prevailing XRF application based on pure oxide standards as described in the ISO standard method are compared to the results of a unique XRF calibration application based on certified reference materials (CRMs) for iron ores and iron ores exploration materials. The universal sample preparation fusion method for iron ores and exploration samples developed during the first phase of this project was used to select and evaluate a set of CRMs. Selected throughout the world from well-recognized sources, the chosen set of CRMs allows a wide coverage for all the elements of interest of the iron ore industry, excluding tin oxide. This fusion method allows a matrix match for materials from different origins. A critical evaluation of precision and accuracy has been performed against the ISO standard method. Reference materials not included in the calibration (control samples) was also investigated for accuracy evaluation. Furthermore, comparisons will be made between the data collected from this fusion method implemented in combination with a Bruker S4 Explorer WDXRF Spectrometer, and the analytical requirements of ISO. All deviations from the prevailing standard method parameters (calibration, standards, flux, Fluxer, etc.) will also be pointed out and discussed.

Type
Technical Articles
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anzelmo, J. A. (2009). “The role of XRF, inter-element corrections, and sample preparation effects in the 100-year evolution of ASTM standard test method C114,” J. ASTM Int. 6(2), 110. Paper ID JAI101730. http://www.astm.org.Google Scholar
Bérubé, L., Rivard, S., and Anzelmo, J. A. (2008). XRF Fusion Precision with TheAnt. International Cement Review, p. 4.Google Scholar
ISO 9516-1:2003 (First edition, 2003-04-01) (2003). Iron ores – Determination of various elements by X-ray fluorescence spectrometry – Part 1: Comprehensive procedure (ISO 9516–1:2003), p. 72.Google Scholar
Loubser, M., Strydom, C., and Potgieter, H. (2004). “A thermogravimetric analysis study of volatilization of flux mixtures used in XRF sample preparation,” X-Ray Spectrom. 33, 212215. DOI: 10.1002/xrs.700.Google Scholar
Spangenberg, J. and Fontboté, L. (1994). “X-ray fluorescence analysis of base metal sulphide and iron-manganese oxide ore samples in fused glass disk”, X-Ray Spectrom. 23, 8390.Google Scholar