Online-only Table 1.
Comparison of SEM-EDS and EPMA-WDS results.
| Sample ID | Laboratory | Technique | SiO2 (wt.%) | TiO2 (wt.%) | Al2O3 (wt.%) | FeOt (wt.%) | MnO (wt.%) | MgO (wt.%) | CaO (wt.%) | Na2O (wt.%) | K2O (wt.%) | Cl (wt.%) | P2O5 (wt.%) | SO3 (wt.%) | F (wt.%) | Original Total (wt.%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OH-DP-1700.6 | UoP | SEM-EDS | mean (n = 7) | 73.62 | 0.05 | 14.51 | 0.95 | 0.01 | 0.33 | 1.30 | 2.98 | 6.24 | 0.18 | 100.00 | |||
| OH-DP-1700.6 | UoP | SEM-EDS | standard deviation | 0.22 | 0.06 | 0.15 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.03 | 0.01 | |||
| OH-DP-1700.6 | UoP | SEM-EDS | relative standard deviation | 0.3% | 125.1% | 1.0% | 6.1% | 244.9% | 23.0% | 7.9% | 7.1% | 3.1% | 17.8% | 0.0% | |||
| OH-DP-1700.6 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | mean (n = 11) | 73.82 | 0.13 | 14.51 | 1.10 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 1.16 | 3.14 | 5.99 | 0.22 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.42 | 95.81 |
| OH-DP-1700.6 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | standard deviation | 0.17 | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.17 | 1.33 |
| OH-DP-1700.6 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | relative standard deviation | 0.2% | 20.2% | 0.8% | 4.3% | 25.8% | 19.5% | 4.1% | 2.4% | 1.3% | 7.7% | 130.3% | 105.7% | 42.0% | 1.4% |
| OH-DP-1700.6 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | mean (n = 17) | 73.59 | 0.13 | 14.24 | 1.10 | 0.12 | 0.08 | 1.02 | 3.17 | 6.52 | 0.23 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.43 | 95.13 |
| OH-DP-1700.6 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | standard deviation | 0.82 | 0.03 | 0.32 | 0.14 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.10 | 0.70 | 0.40 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.23 | 0.99 |
| OH-DP-1700.6 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | relative standard deviation | 1.1% | 21.2% | 2.2% | 13.1% | 51.8% | 53.3% | 9.7% | 22.1% | 6.1% | 5.8% | 83.3% | 127.7% | 52.1% | 1.0% |
| BIAS% UoP to UoC | 0.03% | −60.18% | 1.90% | −13.68% | −88.09% | 334.37% | 27.01% | −5.96% | −4.25% | −21.27% | |||||||
| BIAS% UoP to IGAG CNR | −0.28% | −61.41% | 0.02% | −13.36% | −75.74% | 289.80% | 12.32% | −5.06% | 4.21% | −19.21% | |||||||
| BIAS% IGAG CNR to UoC | 0.31% | 3.20% | 1.88% | −0.37% | −50.90% | 11.43% | 13.07% | −0.94% | −8.12% | −2.55% | −60.50% | −25.17% | −4.16% | ||||
| OH-DP-2603 | UoP | SEM-EDS | mean (n = 20) | 63.15 | 0.41 | 18.77 | 2.63 | 0.19 | 0.56 | 1.06 | 6.64 | 6.61 | 0.41 | 100.00 | |||
| OH-DP-2603 | UoP | SEM-EDS | standard deviation | 0.28 | 0.09 | 0.35 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.46 | 0.23 | 0.06 | 0.01 | |||
| OH-DP-2603 | UoP | SEM-EDS | relative standard deviation | 0.4% | 22.7% | 1.9% | 3.2% | 49.6% | 16.0% | 7.6% | 7.0% | 3.5% | 14.2% | 0.0% | |||
| OH-DP-2603 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | mean (n = 19) | 64.48 | 0.47 | 18.46 | 2.63 | 0.21 | 0.40 | 1.11 | 5.83 | 6.37 | 0.47 | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.29 | 95.91 |
| OH-DP-2603 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | standard deviation | 0.46 | 0.03 | 0.15 | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.36 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.93 |
| OH-DP-2603 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | relative standard deviation | 0.7% | 5.6% | 0.8% | 3.6% | 17.2% | 6.7% | 4.1% | 6.3% | 1.9% | 9.2% | 33.1% | 22.5% | 25.9% | 1.0% |
| OH-DP-2603 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | mean (n = 47) | 61.95 | 0.48 | 18.61 | 2.69 | 0.25 | 0.39 | 1.14 | 7.79 | 6.63 | 0.42 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.28 | 94.64 |
| OH-DP-2603 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | standard deviation | 0.41 | 0.03 | 0.24 | 0.18 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.29 | 0.19 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.21 | 0.78 |
| OH-DP-2603 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | relative standard deviation | 0.7% | 7.3% | 1.3% | 6.7% | 33.5% | 8.5% | 6.0% | 3.7% | 2.9% | 6.6% | 52.1% | 48.0% | 75.8% | 0.8% |
| BIAS% UoP to UoC | 1.93% | −15.15% | 0.85% | −1.91% | −25.56% | 43.48% | −7.53% | −14.81% | −0.43% | −4.40% | |||||||
| BIAS% UoP to IGAG CNR | −2.06% | −12.28% | 1.69% | 0.00% | −12.19% | 40.18% | −4.64% | 13.91% | 3.76% | −13.34% | |||||||
| BIAS% IGAG CNR to UoC | 4.07% | −3.27% | −0.82% | −1.91% | −15.22% | 2.36% | −3.03% | −25.21% | −4.04% | 10.32% | −12.61% | −1.82% | 5.91% | ||||
| OH-DP-2669 | UoP | SEM-EDS | mean (n = 16) | 63.39 | 0.38 | 18.96 | 2.36 | 0.08 | 0.72 | 1.22 | 5.92 | 6.97 | 0.31 | 100.00 | |||
| OH-DP-2669 | UoP | SEM-EDS | standard deviation | 1.13 | 0.13 | 0.46 | 0.37 | 0.11 | 0.19 | 0.22 | 0.58 | 0.95 | 0.13 | 0.01 | |||
| OH-DP-2669 | UoP | SEM-EDS | relative standard deviation | 1.8% | 34.9% | 2.4% | 15.7% | 140.5% | 26.3% | 18.3% | 9.8% | 13.7% | 43.6% | 0.0% | |||
| OH-DP-2669 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | mean (n = 20) | 64.10 | 0.41 | 18.47 | 2.55 | 0.19 | 0.41 | 1.30 | 5.73 | 6.76 | 0.40 | 0.07 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 95.99 |
| OH-DP-2669 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | standard deviation | 0.72 | 0.05 | 0.28 | 0.14 | 0.04 | 0.10 | 0.23 | 0.30 | 0.32 | 0.11 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.53 |
| OH-DP-2669 | IGAG CNR | EPMA-WDS | relative standard deviation | 1.1% | 13.0% | 1.5% | 5.5% | 21.0% | 25.1% | 17.8% | 5.2% | 4.8% | 27.1% | 52.1% | 26.1% | 41.5% | 0.5% |
| OH-DP-2669 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | mean (n = 69) | 62.95 | 0.41 | 18.92 | 2.62 | 0.22 | 0.40 | 1.07 | 6.55 | 6.80 | 0.39 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.28 | 97.14 |
| OH-DP-2669 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | standard deviation | 0.51 | 0.05 | 0.37 | 0.21 | 0.09 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.56 | 0.53 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.21 | 1.50 |
| OH-DP-2669 | UoC | EPMA-WDS | relative standard deviation | 0.8% | 12.0% | 1.9% | 8.0% | 41.6% | 24.6% | 19.2% | 8.5% | 7.9% | 27.6% | 66.6% | 40.9% | 73.7% | 1.5% |
| BIAS% UoP to UoC | 0.70% | −8.75% | 0.18% | −9.84% | −65.28% | 80.97% | 14.29% | −9.63% | 2.57% | −19.79% | |||||||
| BIAS% UoP to IGAG CNR | −1.11% | −8.93% | 2.62% | −7.20% | −60.99% | 73.72% | −6.52% | 3.35% | 3.17% | −22.06% | |||||||
| BIAS% IGAG CNR to UoC | 1.83% | 0.20% | −2.38% | −2.84% | −10.99% | 4.17% | 22.26% | −12.56% | −0.58% | 2.91% | 3.71% | 14.54% | −24.14% |
Based on three samples, which have been each analyzed by SEM-EDS at the University of Pisa (UoP), EPMA-WDS at the IGAG CNR in Rome and EPMA-WDS at the University of Cologne (UoC), the analytical performance of the different techniques and laboratories is assessed. For each laboratory and sample the mean, the standard deviation and relative standard deviation of the laboratory individual analyses is given. The percentagewise difference (bias%) of the means relative to the individual laboratories allows assessment of differences in the analytical performance.