According to a June 2014 Strategic Directions International analysis, the market for handheld devices is the fastest-growing segment among XRF instruments. The data in the report come from a survey of 127 XRF users worldwide. The information in this article was taken from the report, “X-Ray Fluorescence: New Frontiers for a Mature Technology,” which provides updated data from a previous report (see IBO 1/31/11).

According to the analysis of the XRF market, as of 2013, there were over 80,000 active XRF systems in the installed base, with market demand approaching $1 billion. Of the five types of XRF instrumentation, the two most common, energy-dispersive (ED)–XRF and handheld devices, together accounted for three-fourths of active systems. The remaining one-fourth were wavelength-dispersive–XRF, thickness and microspot systems (for measuring thickness of thin films and those with a focused x-ray beam used to analyze small details, respectively), and total-reflection–XRF. The number of handheld units shipped in 2013 surpassed the volume of ED-XRFs shipped, and the two types combined to make up more than three-fourths of shipped systems. The overall XRF market is projected to increase in the low to mid-single digits over the next five years, led by mid- to high-single-digit growth in the handheld-XRF market.

Of survey respondents, 48 had handheld XRF devices, and the average number of handheld XRF systems was 1.5 per lab. Close to the majority of respondents were in North America, with one-quarter in Europe. The remaining users were split about evenly between Asia, and Latin America and Rest of World.

The industry most represented in the survey of handheld XRF users was academia, with one-quarter of respondents, followed by government-research and independent testing-labs, which combined made up about one-third. In considerably smaller numbers were respondents from the mining, government testing, metals, chemicals, biotechnology, cement, electronics polymers/plastics and semiconductor sectors. Additionally, 10% of survey respondents were from other industries.

By lab function, almost one-third of respondents conduct basic research, followed by one-fourth, who provide analytical services. The remaining respondents came from QA/QC and applied R&D labs, followed by methods development and other functions.

Almost 75% of those surveyed used handheld XRF for materials analysis. Life science and environmental applications made up the remainder of specified applications, and 10% fell into other categories.

Most survey respondents reported using handheld devices in the lab. Instruments used equally in the lab and the field numbered slightly higher than those used in the field alone. Field use included scrap analysis, rapid quality evaluation of materials, metal identification, geochemical analysis and environmental applications. Lab use included metal identification and analysis, identification of general materials, rock analysis, and mining and environmental evaluations.

Applications for handheld-instrument use in academia included analysis of rocks and chert, and cultural heritage. Among uses for government researchers were metal identification and geochemical analysis. Independent testing labs also reported using handheld XRF systems for metal identification and art analysis.

Over half of respondents used their devices for primary screening, using another technique for verification. Only in Europe did the majority not use handheld XRF for primary screening, while in North America, half of respondents did. In other regions, primary screening was a function of most respondents’ XRFs.

Half of users in both the chemical, polymers, and plastics industry as well as in the semiconductor, nanotechnology and electronics industry used their handheld-XRF instruments for primary screening. Most government research and testing labs, and cement, metals, and mining labs, and all independent testing labs indicated the same. Of the specified industries, only academia did not use handheld XRF devices for primary screening.

Of specified laboratory function, only respondents from basic-research labs indicated a minority using handheld XRF for primary screening. In analytical services, applied R&D, QA/QC, methods-development and other labs, at least half used their devices for such screening. Half or more of respondents in environmental and materials-analysis applications used handheld XRF for primary screening, while most in life science and other applications did not.

Asked to list the benefits of handheld XRF devices, common responses of those surveyed were portability, cost, ease of use, rapidity and accuracy. Other advantages included nondestructive analysis and no need for sample preparation. Common disadvantages were the need for better calibration, sensitivity, resolution, software, precision and accuracy. Limitations included beam size, detector resolution, sample positioning and poor software. The inability to detect light elements and low power level were also listed.

Respondents indicated that they would like manufacturers of portable XRF devices to improve precision and accuracy, ease of use, software, filter options, battery life and weight. They also suggested improvements in light-element analysis, and features for cultural-heritage and environmental applications. Another request was to allow users the ability to customize instrument settings, including calibration.

Almost three-fourths of respondents expressed an interest, definite or otherwise, in purchasing a new instrument at a later time. About one-sixth planned a purchase in the next year. A small number did not plan to purchase a system again. The primary reason for purchasing a new system was the age of the unit in use. Improved functionality and detection limits were also common reasons.

Given a list of manufacturer qualities, including the quality of service, application support and price competitiveness, respondents listed their satisfaction with the manufacturers of their primary instruments. The highest-rated instruments were Bruker’s S1 Titan, Olympus’s Delta and Niton’s (Thermo Fisher Scientific) XL3T GOLDD.