Errors in quantitative electron microprobe analysis arise from many sources
including those associated with sampling, specimen preparation, instrument
operation, data collection, and analysis. The relative magnitudes of some
of these factors are assessed for a sample of NiAl used to demonstrate impo
rtant concerns in the analysis of even a relatively simple system measured
under standard operating conditions. The results presented are intended to
serve more as a guideline for developing an analytical strategy than as a d
etailed error propagation model that includes all possible sources of varia
bility and inaccuracy. The use of a variety of tools to assess errors is de
monstrated. It is also shown that, as sample characteristics depart from th
ose under which many of the quantitative methods were developed, errors can
increase significantly.