- Sponsor Seminars
These are scheduled events to help delegates test out the tools and platform we will be using for the Q&A and other events at the conference.
Our workshop program provides training and teaching in topics across geochemistry and related fields. We are currently liaising with the workshop organisers to ascertain if any workshops can become virtual. Any updates will be added to this page.
Social Event Locations
These are locations for the conference social events.
(2020) A Perfect MC-ICP-MS Detector Array for Transient Signal Analysis?
Craig G, Vollstaedt H, Lloyd N, Bouman C & Schwieters J
The author has not provided any additional details.
06d: Room 2, View in program
Listed below are questions that have been submitted by the community that the author will try and cover in their presentation. To submit a question, ensure you are signed in to the website. Authors or session conveners approve questions before they are displayed here.
Dear Dr Craig, How do you determine the counting statistics for software-enlarged peak sizes?
Counting statistics can be determined as we would for any normal measurement. If we are doing our job correctly counts are only being moved in time, not created or destroyed.
Hi Grant, impressive indeed! Two questions: 1) the Tau correction is entirely software-driven? As I understood, you know how the peak shape should be, and can correct for the slow signal decay, correct? 2) For those Rb-poor inclusions in this grain, you should have obtained 87Sr/86Sr ratios. What errors (precision and "trueness") are we talking here?
Hi Thomas, in answer to the 1st question the tau correction is indeed software-driven. However, it must be said that other, hardware and firmware correction, are also applied to alter the signal decay profile. We do not know what the peak shape should be to apply corrections, instead we work from what we know of the detection system i order to calculate an input signal from the measured output. For the Rb-poor inclusions the precision the errors on the image did depend on the inclusion size, but 0.2% could be achieved on the 87Sr/86Sr. Limitations were correlated to corrections for REE++ and Kr interferences.
Dear Grant, 1) would the DCI or a similar device increase the sensitivity when combined with dry plasma solution work (I guess large droplets from wet plasma need their residence time in the plasma for desolvation). Is it very sensitive to torch positioning? Would matrix (mass bias)-effects improve or get worse? 2) Could you imagine non-imaging applications using the DCI with a smoothing device to increase sensitivity while sacrificing the fast response e.g. for sake of isotope ratio measurement stability using 10^13 and 10^11 Ohm resistors?
Sign in to ask a question.