Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (3) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (3)
Referierte Publikation
- ja (3)
Schlagworte
- International intercomparison (3) (entfernen)
The capabilities of National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) and selected outside expert laboratories of determining the mass fractions of the main and minor elements Cu, Pb, Sn, Fe, and Ni in a lead-containing brass were assessed. This pilot study P76 was organized as an activity of the Inorganic Analysis Working Group of CCQM and was piloted by the Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM). In total 12 laboratories (four NMIs and eight outside labs) submitted results, some of them more than one set of results per element. The laboratories were free to choose any analytical method they wanted to use for the analysis. Consequently various methods of measurement were employed: inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICPOES), inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICPMS), instrumental neutron-activation analysis (INAA), titrimetry, flame atomic-absorption spectrometry (FAAS), spectrophotometry (MAS), electrogravimetry, and gravimetric analysis. After testing for homogeneity within BAM, a certified reference material of lead-containing brass was used as test sample without informing the participants about the source of the material. The agreement of the results for all elements investigated was acceptable and mean values calculated from the results of all participants were close to the certified mass fractions of the CRM used as test sample. No statistically significant differences between the results of the NMIs and those of the non-NMIs could be observed.
The capabilities of National Metrology Institutes (NMIsthose which are members of the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM)of the CIPM) and selected outside "expert" laboratories to quantitate (C4H9)3Sn+ (TBT) in a prepared marine sediment were assessed. This exercise was sanctioned by the 7th CCQM meeting, April 46, 2001, as an activity of the Inorganic Analysis Working Group and was jointly piloted by the Institute for National Measurement Standards of the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) and the Laboratory of the Government Chemist (LGC), UK. A total of 11 laboratories submitted results (7 NMIs, and 4 external labs). Two external laboratories utilized a standard calibration approach based on a natural abundance TBT standard, whereas all NMIs relied upon isotope dilution mass spectrometry for quantitation. For this purpose, a species specific 117Sn-enriched TBT standard was supplied by the LGC. No sample preparation methodology was prescribed by the piloting laboratories and, by consequence, a variety of approaches was adopted by the participants, including mechanical shaking, sonication, accelerated solvent extraction, microwave assisted extraction and heating in combination with Grignard derivatization, ethylation and direct sampling. Detection techniques included ICPMS (with GC and HPLC sample introduction), GCMS, GCAED and GCFPD. Recovery of TBT from a control standard (NRCC CRM PACS-2 marine sediment) averaged 93.5±2.4% (n=14). Results for the pilot material averaged 0.680±0.015 µmol kg1 (n=14; 80.7±1.8 µg kg1) with a median value of 0.676 µmol kg1. Overall, performance was substantially better than state-of-the-art expectations and the satisfactory agreement amongst participants permitted scheduling of a follow-up Key comparison for TBT (K-28), a Pilot intercomparison for DBT (P-43), and certification of the test sediment for TBT content and its release as a new Certified Reference Material (HIPA-1) with a TBT content of 0.679±0.089 µmol kg1 (expanded uncertainty, k=2, as Sn) (80.5±10.6 µg kg1). Electronic Supplementary Material Supplementary material is available in the online version of this article at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-2016-9.
An international intercomparison involving eight national metrology institutes (NMIs) was conducted to establish their current measurement capabilities for determining five selected congeners from the brominated flame retardant classes polybrominated diphenyl ethers and polybrominated biphenyls. A candidate reference material consisting of polypropylene fortified with technical mixtures of penta-, octa- and decabromo diphenyl ether and decabromo biphenyl, which was thoroughly assessed for material homogeneity and stability, was used as study material. The analytical procedures applied by the participants differed with regard to sample pre-treatment, extraction, clean-up, employed calibrants and type of calibration procedure as well as regarding analytical methods used for separation, identification and quantification of the flame retardant congeners (gas chromatography coupled to an electron capture detector (GC-ECD), gas chromatography-mass spectrometry in the electron ionisation mode (GC-EI-MS), gas chromatography-mass spectrometry in the electron capture negative ionisation mode (GC-ECNI-MS), and liquid chromatography-inductive coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (LC-ICP-MS)). The laboratory means agreed well with relative standard deviations of the mean of means of 1.9%, 4.8%, 5.5% and 5.4% for brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) 47, 183 and 209 and for the brominated biphenyl (BB) congener 209, respectively. For BDE 206, a relative standard deviation of 28.5% was obtained. For all five congeners, within-laboratory relative standard deviations of six measurements obtained under intermediate precision conditions were between 1% and 10%, and reported expanded measurements uncertainties typically ranged from 4% to 10% (8% to 14% for BDE 206). Furthermore, the results are in good agreement with those obtained in the characterization exercise for determining certified values for the flame retardant congeners in the same material. The results demonstrate the state-of-the-art measurement capabilities of NMIs for quantifying representative BDE congeners and BB 209 in a polymer. The outcome of this intercomparison (pilot study) in conjunction with possible improvements for employing exclusively calibrants with thoroughly assessed purity suggests that a key comparison aiming at underpinning calibration and measurement capability (CMC) claims of NMIs can be conducted.