An Exploration of Matrix Effect on Optimal Defocus Distance of Metal Matrix in Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy

Yuanxia Fu; Ren Jia; Peng Xu; Ling Xue; Guanxin Yao; Xianfeng Zheng; Zhengbo Qin; Xinyan Yang; Zhifeng Cui

doi:10.3788/CJL202249.1311003

Chinese Journal of Lasers, Volume. 49, Issue 13, 1311003(2022)

An Exploration of Matrix Effect on Optimal Defocus Distance of Metal Matrix in Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy

Yuanxia Fu^1,2, Ren Jia¹, Peng Xu¹, Ling Xue¹, Guanxin Yao^1,3, Xianfeng Zheng^1,3, Zhengbo Qin^1,3, Xinyan Yang^1,3, and Zhifeng Cui^1,3、*

Author Affiliations

¹College of Physics and Electronic Information, Anhui Normal University, Wuhu 240002, Anhui , China

²Department of Science, Bengbu University, Bengbu 233030, Anhui , China

³Key Laboratory of Photoelectric Materials Science and Technology of Anhui Province, Wuhu 240002, Anhui , China

show less

Abstract Get PDF(in Chinese)

Figures & Tables(7)

Fig. 1. Experimental setup

Download full size

Fig. 2. Measured LIBS spectra of 12 samples

Download full size

Fig. 3. Influence of defocus distance of different matrixs on spectral line intensity

Download full size

Table 1. Physical parameters of metal samples

View table

Table 1. Physical parameters of metal samples

Sample	T_b /℃	ΔH_fus /(kJ·mol^－1)	ΔH_vap /(kJ·mol^－1)	λ /(J·cm^－1·s^－1·℃^－1)	C_p /(J·g^－1·℃^－1)
Ni	2732	17.47	370.4	0.910	0.439
Co	2900	16.19	377.0	1.050	0.414
Cr	2482	16.90	339.5	0.970	0.460
Cu	2595	13.26	300.0	4.060	0.385
V	3030	17.60	458.6	0.300	0.498
In	2005	3.29	231.8	0.850	0.238
Sn	2270	7.15	295.8	0.670	0.226
Gd	3010	10.05	359.4	0.088	0.297
Er	2900	19.90	261.0	0.096	0.167
Nb	4927	26.40	689.9	0.520	0.271
Zn	907	7.32	115.0	1.170	0.383
Bi	1560	11.13	108.1	0.090	0.123

Table 2. Classification of metal samples according to different physical parameters

View table

Table 2. Classification of metal samples according to different physical parameters

Classify	Sample
Difference in α and H_M	Ni, Co, Cr
Difference in C_p,ΔH_fus, and ΔH_vap	Gd, Ni, Co, Er
Difference in σ and λ	Cu, Ni, V, Cr
Difference in ρ，T_m and T_b	V, Nb, Co, Zn, Bi, Er
Difference in I_p	In, Sn

Table 3. Optimal defocus distance of different matrixs

View table

Table 3. Optimal defocus distance of different matrixs

Classify	Sample	Optimal defocus distance /mm
Difference in α and H_M，	Ni	－7.5
	Co	－7.0
	Cr	－6.5
Difference in C_p,ΔH_fus, and ΔH_vap	Gd	－7.0
	Ni	－7.5
	Co	－7.0
	Er	－3.0
Difference in σ and λ	Cu	－6.0
	Ni	－7.5
	V	－8.5
	Cr	－6.5
Difference in ρ，T_m and T_b	V	－8.5
	Nb	－7.5
	Co	－7.0
	Zn	－8.0
	Bi	－4.0
	Er	－3.0
Difference in I_p	In	－7.5
Difference in I_p	Sn	－8.5

Table 4. Correlation coefficient between physical parameters of each matrix and optimal defocus distance
View table
Table 4. Correlation coefficient between physical parameters of each matrix and optimal defocus distance
Physical parameter Correlation coefficient
F_D －0.769
F_H －1.037
F_OA 0. 597
F_IP －0.737
F_EC －0.095
F_HC 12.62
F_SH 27.72
F_MP －0.014
F_BP 0.004
F_MH 0.179
F_VH 0.026

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Yuanxia Fu, Ren Jia, Peng Xu, Ling Xue, Guanxin Yao, Xianfeng Zheng, Zhengbo Qin, Xinyan Yang, Zhifeng Cui. An Exploration of Matrix Effect on Optimal Defocus Distance of Metal Matrix in Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy[J]. Chinese Journal of Lasers, 2022, 49(13): 1311003

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites

Paper Information

Category: spectroscopy

Received: Oct. 26, 2021

Accepted: Dec. 22, 2021

Published Online: Jun. 13, 2022

The Author Email: Cui Zhifeng (zfcui@ahnu.edu.cn)

DOI:10.3788/CJL202249.1311003

Topics

laser devices and laser physics

Lasers and Laser Optics

Laser physics

laser manufacturing

Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology

Table 1. Physical parameters of metal samples

Table 1. Physical parameters of metal samples

Table 2. Classification of metal samples according to different physical parameters

Table 2. Classification of metal samples according to different physical parameters

Table 3. Optimal defocus distance of different matrixs

Table 3. Optimal defocus distance of different matrixs

Table 4. Correlation coefficient between physical parameters of each matrix and optimal defocus distance

Table 4. Correlation coefficient between physical parameters of each matrix and optimal defocus distance