Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of the observation area (A), detection limit of Cu (LODCu), radiation dose (D) and figure-of-merit (FOMD) performances among PIXRF, conventional XRF, and a commercially available handheld XRF device

From: Low-radiation dose XRF excited by MeV protons for cultural heritage samples

Analytical method

A (mm2)

LODCu (ppm)

D (mGy)

FOMD (mGyâ‹…mm2â‹…ppm2)

This study

PIXRF

0.049

80

14

4 × 103

Conventional XRF

32

430

2 × 104

Commercially-available handheld XRF [42, 44]

25

5–7

670

4–8 × 104