TY - JOUR A1 - Philipp, Rosemarie A1 - Lalere, B. A1 - Gantois, F. A1 - Sánchez, C. A1 - Sáez, A. A1 - Bebić, J. A1 - Banjanac, K. A1 - Alexopoulos, Ch. A1 - Kakoulides, E. A1 - Claramunt, A. V. A1 - Janko, P. A1 - Jotanovic, A. A1 - Hafner-Vuk, K. A1 - Buzoianu, M. A1 - Mihail, R. A1 - Fernández, M. M. A1 - Etcheverry, J. A1 - Mbithi Muendo, B. A1 - Muriira Karau, G. A1 - Silva, A. A1 - Almirón, F. A1 - Marajh, D. A1 - Makgatho, P. A1 - Visser, R. A1 - Alaskar, A. R. A1 - Alosaimi, A. A1 - Alrashed, M. A1 - Yılmaz, H. A1 - Ün, İ. A1 - Gündüz, S. A1 - Topal, K. A1 - Bilsel, M. A1 - Karasinski, J. A1 - Torres, J. T1 - Supplementary comparison study - measurement capabilities for the quantification of ethanol in water N2 - The accurate quantification of ethanol in water is essential for forensic applications such as blood and breath alcohol testing and for commercial applications such as the assessment of alcoholic beverages. The intercomparison EURAMET.QM-S14 is part of a capacity building project named ALCOREF “Certified forensic alcohol reference materials” that is running within the European Metrology Programme for Innovation and Research (EMPIR). The intercomparison should allow project partners and other interested National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) and Designated Institutes (DIs) to benchmark their analytical methods for the quantification of ethanol in water. The study plan was agreed by the European Association of National Metrology Institutes (EURAMET) Subcommittee Bio- and Organic Analysis (SCBOA) and the Organic Analysis Working Group (OAWG) of the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM) in February and April 2019, respectively. The intercomparison was coordinated by BAM. Two concentration levels relevant for the calibration and verification of evidential breath alcohol analysers were distributed to study participants. Fifteen institutes from 15 countries registered for the intercomparison and returned results. Participants mostly applied gas chromatography with flame ionisation detection (GC-FID) or mass spectroscopy (GC-MS), one participant used titrimetry and one participant employed a test bench for breath analyser calibration (“bubble train”). Participants did either in-house purity assessment of their commercial ethanol calibrants by Karl-Fischer titration, chromatographic methods, quantitative nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (qNMR) and/or density measurements; or they used ethanol/water Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) from NMIs/DIs for calibration. CCQM OAWG agreed to use a consensus value from participants results that utilizes the reported uncertainties as Key Comparison Reference Value (KCRV). The Gaussian Random effects model with Hierarchical Bayesian solution (HB-REM) is a reasonable approach in this case. The KCRVs and Degrees of Equivalence (DoEs) were calculated with the NIST consensus builder version 1.2 Hierarchical Bayes procedure. Successful participation in the interlaboratory comparison has demonstrated the capabilities in determining the mass fraction of ethanol in aqueous matrices in the range 0.1 mg/g to 8 mg/g. Fourteen out of 15 participants have successfully quantified both samples, one participant successfully quantified only the lower-level (0.6 mg/g) sample. KW - Certified reference material KW - EURAMET KW - EMPIR KW - ALCOREF KW - Ethanol in water KW - Supplementary comparison PY - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/59/1A/08015 VL - 59 IS - 1A SP - 08015 PB - IOP Publishing AN - OPUS4-55889 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Vogl, Jochen A1 - Kipphardt, Heinrich A1 - Richter, Silke A1 - Bremser, Wolfram A1 - Arvizu Torres, M. A1 - Lara Manzano, J. A1 - Buzoianu, M. A1 - Hill, S. A1 - Petrov, P. A1 - Goenaga-Infante, H. A1 - Sargent, M. A1 - Fisicaro, P. A1 - Labarraque, G. A1 - Zhou, T. A1 - Turk, G. C. A1 - Winchester, M. A1 - Miura, T. A1 - Methven, B. A1 - Sturgeon, R. A1 - Jährling, R. A1 - Rienitz, O. A1 - Mariassy, M. A1 - Hankova, Z. A1 - Sobina, E. A1 - Krylov, A. I. A1 - Kustikov, Y. A. A1 - Smirnov, V. V. T1 - Establishing comparability and compatibility in the purity assessment of high purity zinc as demonstrated by the CCQM-P149 intercomparison N2 - For the first time, an international comparison was conducted on the determination of the purity of a high purity element. Participants were free to choose any analytical approach appropriate for their institute’s applications and services. The material tested was a high purity zinc, which had earlier been assessed for homogeneity and previously used in CCQM-K72 for the determination of six defined metallic impurities. Either a direct metal assay of the Zn mass fraction was undertaken by EDTA titrimetry, or an indirect approach was used wherein all impurities, or at least the major ones, were determined and their sum subtracted from ideal purity of 100 %, or 1 kg/kg. Impurity assessment techniques included glow discharge mass spectrometry, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and carrier gas hot extraction/combustion analysis. Up to 91 elemental impurities covering metals, non-metals and semi-metals/metalloids were quantified. Due to the lack of internal experience or experimental capabilities, some participants contracted external laboratories for specific analytical tasks, mainly for the analysis of non-metals. The reported purity, expressed as zinc mass fraction in the high purity zinc material, showed excellent agreement for all participants, with a relative standard deviation of 0.011 %. The calculated reference value, w(Zn) = 0.999 873 kg/kg, was assigned an asymmetric combined uncertainty of + 0.000025 kg/kg and – 0.000028 kg/kg. Comparability amongst participating metrology institutes is thus demonstrated for the purity determination of high purity metals which have no particular difficulties with their decomposition / dissolution process when solution-based analytical methods are used, or which do not have specific difficulties when direct analysis approaches are used. Nevertheless, further development is required in terms of uncertainty assessment, quantification of non-metals and the determination of purity of less pure elements and/or for those elements suffering difficulties with the decomposition process. KW - Purity assessment KW - Direct metal assay KW - Impurity assessment KW - Non-metal analysis KW - High-purity elements KW - SI-traceability PY - 2018 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1088/1681-7575/aaa677 SN - 1681-7575 SN - 0026-1394 VL - 55 IS - 2 SP - 211 EP - 221 PB - Institute of Physics Publishing CY - Bristol AN - OPUS4-44257 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Richter, Janine A1 - Elordui-Zapatarietxe, S. A1 - Emteborg, H. A1 - Fettig, Ina A1 - Cabillic, J. A1 - Alasonati, E. A1 - Gantois, F. A1 - Swart, C. A1 - Gokcen, T. A1 - Tunc, M. A1 - Binici, B. A1 - Rodriguez-Cea, A. A1 - Zuliani, T. A1 - Gonzalez Gago, A. A1 - Pröfrock, D. A1 - Nousiainen, M. A1 - Sawal, G. A1 - Buzoianu, M. A1 - Philipp, Rosemarie T1 - An interlaboratory comparison on whole water samples N2 - The European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC requires monitoring of organic priority pollutants in so-called whole water samples, i.e. in aqueous nonfiltered samples that contain natural colloidal and suspended particulate matter. Colloids and suspended particles in the liquid phase constitute a challenge for sample homogeneity and stability. Within the joint research project ENV08 ‘‘Traceable measurements for monitoring critical pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC’’, whole water test materials were developed by spiking defined amounts of aqueous slurries of ultrafinely milled contaminated soil or sediment and aqueous solutions of humic acid into a natural mineral water matrix. This paper presents the results of an European-wide interlaboratory comparison (ILC) using this type of test materials. Target analytes were tributyltin, polybrominated diphenyl ethers and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the ng/L concentration range. Results of the ILC indicate that the produced materials are sufficiently homogeneous and stable to serve as samples for, e.g. proficiency testing or method validation. To our knowledge, this is the first time that ready-to-use water materials with a defined amount of suspended particulate and colloidal matter have been applied as test samples in an interlaboratory exercise. These samples meet the requirements of the European Water Framework Directive. Previous proficiency testing schemes mainly employed filtered water samples fortified with a spike of the target analyte in a water-miscible organic solvent. KW - Water Framework Directive KW - Wasserrahmenrichtlinie KW - Interlaboratory comparison KW - Ringversuch KW - Whole water sample KW - Gesamtwasserprobe PY - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-015-1190-8 SN - 0949-1775 SN - 1432-0517 VL - 21 IS - 2 SP - 121 EP - 129 PB - Springer AN - OPUS4-35730 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Rienitz, O. A1 - Schiel, D. A1 - Görlitz, V. A1 - Jährling, R. A1 - Vogl, Jochen A1 - Lara-Manzano, J.V. A1 - Zon, A. A1 - Fung, W.-H. A1 - Buzoianu, M. A1 - De Sena, R.C. A1 - Dos Reis, L.A. A1 - Valiente, L. A1 - Yim, Y.-H. A1 - Hill, S. A1 - Champion, R. A1 - Fisicaro, P. A1 - Bing, W. A1 - Turk, G.C. A1 - Winchester, M. R. A1 - Saxby, D. A1 - Merrick, J. A1 - Hioki, A. A1 - Miura, T. A1 - Suzuki, T. A1 - Linsky, M. A1 - Barzev, A. A1 - Máriássy, M. A1 - Cankur, O. A1 - Ari, B. A1 - Tunc, M. A1 - Konopelko, L.A. A1 - Kustikov, Y.A. A1 - Bezruchko, M. T1 - Final report on CCQM-K87: Mono-elemental calibration solutions N2 - The aim of this comparison was to demonstrate the capability of national metrology institutes to measure elemental mass fractions at a level of w(E) ≈ 1 g/kg as found in almost all mono-elemental calibration solutions. These calibration solutions represent an important link in traceability systems in inorganic analysis. Virtually all traceable routine measurements are linked to the SI through these calibration solutions. Every participant was provided with three solutions of each of the three selected elements chromium, cobalt and lead. This comparison was a joint activity of the Inorganic Analysis Working Group (IAWG) and the Electrochemical Analysis Working Group (EAWG) of the CCQM and was piloted by the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB, Braunschweig, Germany) with the help of the Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung (BAM, Berlin, Germany), the Centro Nacional de Metrología (CENAM, Querétaro, Mexico) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST, Gaithersburg, USA). A small majority of participants applied inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP OES) in combination with a variety of calibration strategies (one-point-calibration, bracketing, calibration curve, each with and without an internal standard). But also IDMS techniques were carried out on quadrupole, high resolution and multicollector ICP-MS machines as well as a TIMS machine. Several participants applied titrimetry. FAAS as well as ICP-MS combined with non-IDMS calibration strategies were used by at least one participant. The key comparison reference values (KCRV) were agreed upon during the IAWG/EAWG meeting in November 2011 held in Sydney as the added element content calculated from the gravimetric sample preparation. Accordingly the degrees of equivalence were calculated. Despite the large variety of methods applied no superior method could be identified. The relative deviation of the median of the participants' results from the gravimetric reference value was equal or smaller than 0.1% (with an average of 0.05%) in the case of all three elements. KW - CCQM KW - Metrology KW - IDMS PY - 2012 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/49/1A/08010 SN - 0026-1394 SN - 1681-7575 VL - 49 IS - 08010, 1A (Technical Supplement 2012) SP - 1 EP - 104 PB - Inst. of Physics Publ. CY - Bristol AN - OPUS4-30458 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Molloy, J. L. A1 - Winchester, M. R. A1 - Butler, T. A. A1 - Possolo, A. M. A1 - Rienitz, O. A1 - Roethke, A. A1 - Goerlitz, V. A1 - Caciano de Sena, R. A1 - Dominguez Almeida, M. A1 - Yang, L. A1 - Methven, B. A1 - Nadeau, K. A1 - Romero Arancibia, P. A1 - Bing, W. A1 - Tao, Z. A1 - Snell, J. A1 - Vogl, Jochen A1 - Koenig, Maren A1 - Kotnala, R. K. A1 - Swarupa Tripathy, S. A1 - Elishian, C. A1 - Ketrin, R. A1 - Suzuki, T. A1 - Oduor Okumu, T. A1 - Yim, Y.-H. A1 - Heo, S. W. A1 - Min, H. S. A1 - Sub Han, M. A1 - Lim, Y. A1 - Velina Lara Manzano, J. A1 - Segoviano Regalado, F. A1 - Arvizu Torres, M. A1 - Valle Moya, E. A1 - Buzoianu, M. A1 - Sobina, A. A1 - Zyskin, V. A1 - Sobina, E. A1 - Migal, P. A1 - Linsky, M. A1 - Can, S. Z. A1 - Ari, B. A1 - Goenaga Infante, H. T1 - CCQM-K143 Comparison of Copper Calibration Solutions Prepared by NMIs/DIs N2 - CCQM-K143 is a key comparison that assesses participants’ ability to prepare single element calibration solutions. Preparing calibration solutions properly is the cornerstone of establishing a traceability link to the International System of Units (SI), and therefore should be tested in order to confirm the validity of CCQM comparisons of more complex materials. CCQM-K143 consisted of participants each preparing a single copper calibration solution at 10 g/kg copper mass fraction and shipping 10 bottled aliquots of that solution to the coordinating laboratory, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The masses and mass fraction for the prepared solutions were documented with the submitted samples. The solutions prepared by all participants were measured at NIST by high performance inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (HP-ICP-OES). The intensity measurements for copper were not mapped onto values of mass fraction via calibration. Instead, ratios were computed between the measurements for copper and simultaneous measurements for manganese, the internal standard, and all subsequent data reductions, including the computation of the KCRV and the degrees of equivalence, were based on these ratios. Other than for two participants whose measurement results appeared to suffer from calculation or preparation errors, all unilateral degrees of equivalence showed that the measured values did not differ significantly from the KCRV. These results were confirmed by a second set of ICP-OES measurements performed by the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB). CCQM-K143 showed that participants are capable of preparing calibration solutions starting from high purity, assayed copper metal. Similar steps are involved when preparing solutions for other elements, so it seems safe to infer that similar capabilities should prevail when preparing many different, single-element solutions. KW - Metrology KW - Primary calibration solution KW - Traceability PY - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/58/1A/08006 SN - 0026-1394 VL - 58 IS - 1A SP - 08006 PB - IOP Science CY - Cambridge AN - OPUS4-51983 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER -