Rapid qualitative determination of main components in archeological samples by radioisotope-excited X-ray fluorescence analysis

Shenberg, C.; Boazi, M.

doi:10.1007/bf02520583

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors (25) state that each oil has the ability to deactivate a specific amount of sulfonate. Although not strictly a tracer method, radioisotope sources for x-ray fluorescence continue to increase in number and application; among the latter is the use of 241Am-I and 241Am-Tm for examination of archaeological specimens (26). A patent (27) has been granted for a three source (Ey = 750 keV, Ey = ~20 keV, neutron), multiple detector radiometric analyzer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nucleonics

Lyon¹,

Ross²

1978

Anal. Chem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Activation with 10 MeV, Z 3-42 (210) Activation with 10 MeV,Z 44-82 (211) Activation with 20 MeV, Z >26 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nucleonics

Lyon¹,

Ross²

1978

Anal. Chem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Further investigation of majolica ceramics assigned to the Puebla (Mexico) provenance by radioisotope induced x‐ray fluorescence

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A simple radioisotope x-ray fluorescence method for determining the relative mass fractions of rubidium, strontium and zirconium combined with principal component analysis was employed to investigate specimens of archaeological majolica ceramics tentatively assigned to the Puebla (Mexico) provenance by stylistic features. Principal component analysis with this x-ray fluorescence data could only separate the samples of one of the four groups from the other three as suggested from the thermoluminescence glow curves. Similarly, when the thermoluminescence data were analyzed by the principal component technique only the same group could be separated from the three others. However, the X-ray fluorescence method could confirm and separate the samples of the four groups with the additional information from the thermoluminescence data. Hence it can be concluded that the clay and/or temper materials from the different specimens of the four groups are different. The difference in the clay materials could be from contamination or different sources of the components of the clay paste themselves. It is concluded that the difference is due to the clay source, since samples found at the same locations belonged to more than one group.

show abstract