Well, we get to try some scandium analysis, so time to see what might be a good, trust-worthy standard. Anyone have any experience with this?
Quote from: UMass Probe Facility on January 14, 2015, 03:36:20 PM
Well, we get to try some scandium analysis, so time to see what might be a good, trust-worthy standard. Anyone have any experience with this?
Hi there,
Usually scandium is a trace element, therefore it wouldn't really matter what you use as a standard (the background characterization being the critical aspect for a trace element). So if it is indeed a trace element, why not just scandium metal?
If the scandium is present in higher concentrations and you'd prefer a closer matrix match, there is a ScPO4 standard out there. See attached paper below.
john
Crystal gmbh is having a sale on some substrate material at the moment.
57 euro for a 5×5×1 mm substrate of DyScO3
http://crystal-gmbh.com/en/customers/sale.php
Note the unpleasant shipping charges.
This is very helpful John and Jeremy. I didn't think to check the Boatner set, but this makes perfect sense as many chemists put it with the rare earths. Sure enough we had a small piece of ScPO4 in a capsule that was never mounted. Of course, we know the issues with those orthophosphate standards. Truly pure metal seems to be a bit hard to come by (usually has some Ta component), and they ship under Argon I think, so maybe not too stable (and it's expensive). This DyScO3 substrate is really interesting. The Sc in the unknown maybe major, it is at least minor, and not trace.
In addition MTI (www.mtixtl.com) sells polished DyScO3, GdScO3, and TbScO3 (respectively, U.S.$ 129, 85, and 100).
I obtained some Sc metal turnings from PIDC, Lot A43932-ER. The certificate of analysis reported (in ppm): Al 304, Ni 94, Si 77, Fe 54, Cu 32, Th 12, Ti 10, along with a host of elements less than 5 ppm, yielding a Sc concentration of 99.94 wt%. I note that Ta was not analyzed.
I still have around 4 g of turnings, and a 2 g vacuum-melted lump.