OBJECTIVE

1. CHARACTERIZATION OF AERONAUTICAL AND AEROSPACE METAL MATERIALS THROUGH THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE XRF vs. ICP-OES AND FESEM-EDS TECHNIQUES V. Brusadin, C. Iacovella, G. Modesti, M. Bernabei Aeronautica Militare - Centro Sperimentale di Volo - Reparto Chimico (Aeroporto “M. De Bernardi” - Pratica di Mare – Pomezia, Roma) OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is the characterization of metal materials by the quantitativechemical analysis of aeronautical massive samples performed with the XRF technique and comparing this technique with the ICP-OESand FESEM-EDStechniques. MATERIALS and METHOD XRF INSTRUMENTATION Twin Agent foam/powder wheeled unit Drawing – AMX fighter bomber and reconnaissance aircraft Fig. 1: AMX aircraft; evidence of Drawing, aircraft’s aluminium alloy structural component fixed on trailing edge of half-wing between fuselage and flap (yellow circle) Wing Diffusion Joint – Tornado combat aircraft Fig. 2: TORNADO aircraft; evidence of Wing Diffusion Joint (WDJ, white circle) WDJ is composed by an aluminium alloy panel (Wing Lower Skin Panel – WLSP) to contact with a titanium structure (Wing Lower Pivot Lug – WLPL) CONCLUSIONS SEMI-QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIScan be performed by XRFtechnique as well as EDS microanalysis for screening analysis of unknown metal samples. The XRF technique, operating at a higher power respect to the EDS,gives an error measure lower than that obtained with the EDS. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS performed by the XRFtechnique allows to determine the exact chemical composition of metal materials, as well as the ICP-OES, the reference technique used for the characterization of alloys (UNI EN 10351:2011; UNI EN 14242:2004). The XRF technique, already normed for High Alloy Steels (UNI EN 10315:2006), can be performed also for Aluminium and Titanium alloys. • XRF technique • non-destructive • no chemical risk for operator and/or ambient • reduced analytical times • cost cut E-mail address: v.brusadin@mclink.it (Dott.ssa Brusadin Valentina)