Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (7)
Schlagworte
- Gas analysis (2)
- SiO2 (2)
- Atomic force microscopy (1)
- CCQM-K101 (1)
- EDX (1)
- EURAMET.QM-K111 (1)
- High-resolution scanning electron microscope (SEM) (1)
- Interlaboratory comparison (1)
- Large area SDD (1)
- Metrological traceability (1)
Results of an interlaboratory comparison on size characterization of SiO2 airborne nanoparticles using on-line and off-line measurement techniques are discussed. This study was performed in the framework of Technical Working Area (TWA) 34—'Properties of Nanoparticle Populations' of the Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards (VAMAS) in the project no. 3 'Techniques for characterizing size distribution of airborne nanoparticles'. Two types of nano-aerosols, consisting of (1) one population of nanoparticles with a mean diameter between 30.3 and 39.0 nm and (2) two populations of non-agglomerated nanoparticles with mean diameters between, respectively, 36.2–46.6 nm and 80.2–89.8 nm, were generated for characterization measurements. Scanning mobility particle size spectrometers (SMPS) were used for on-line measurements of size distributions of the produced nano-aerosols. Transmission electron microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and atomic force microscopy were used as off-line measurement techniques for nanoparticles characterization. Samples were deposited on appropriate supports such as grids, filters, and mica plates by electrostatic precipitation and a filtration technique using SMPS controlled generation upstream. The results of the main size distribution parameters (mean and mode diameters), obtained from several laboratories, were compared based on metrological approaches including metrological traceability, calibration, and evaluation of the measurement uncertainty. Internationally harmonized measurement procedures for airborne SiO2 nanoparticles characterization are proposed.
The analytical performance of high-resolution scanning electron microscopy/energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDX) for accurate determination of the size, size distribution, qualitative elemental analysis of nanoparticles (NPs) was systematically investigated. It is demonstrated how powerful high-resolution SEM is by using both mono- and bi-modal distributions of SiO2 airborne NPs collected on appropriate substrates after their generation from colloidal suspension. The transmission mode of the SEM (TSEM) is systematically employed for NPs prepared on thin film substrates such as transmission electron microscopy grids. Measurements in the transmission mode were performed by using a 'single-unit' TSEM transmission setup as manufactured and patented by Zeiss. This alternative to the 'conventional' STEM detector consists of a special sample holder that is used in conjunction with the in-place EverhartThornley detector. In addition, the EDX capabilities for imaging NPs, highlighting the promising potential with respect to exploitation of the sensitivity of the new large area silicon drift detector energy dispersive X-ray spectrometers were also investigated. The work was carried out in the frame of a large prenormative VAMAS (Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards) project, dedicated to finding appropriate methods and procedures for traceable characterization of NP size and size distribution.
This key comparison aims to assess the core capabilities of the participants in gas analysis. Such competences include, among others, the capabilities to prepare Primary Standard gas Mixtures (PSMs), perform the necessary purity analysis on the materials used in the gas mixture preparation, the verification of the composition of newly prepared PSMs against existing ones, and the capability of calibrating the composition of a gas mixture. According to the Strategy for Key Comparisons of the Gas Analysis Working Group, this key comparison is classified as an RMO track A key comparison.
The artefacts were binary mixtures of propane in nitrogen at a nominal amount-of-substance fraction level of 1000 μmol/mol. The values and uncertainties from the gravimetric gas mixture preparation were used as key comparison reference values (KCRVs). Each transfer standard had its own KCRV. The results are generally good. All results are within ± 1 % of the KCRV.
There is a high international priority attached to activities which reduce NOx in the atmosphere. The current level of permitted emissions is typically between 50 µmol/mol and 100 µmol/mol, but lower values are expected in the future. Currently, ambient air quality monitoring regulations also require the measurement of NOx mole fractions as low as 0.2 µmol/mol. The production of accurate standards at these levels of mole fractions requires either dilution of a stable higher concentration gas standard or production by a dynamic technique, for example one based on permeation tubes.
The CCQM-K74 key comparison was designed to evaluate the level of comparability of National Metrology Institutes' measurement capabilities and standards for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) at a nominal mole fraction of 10 µmol/mol.
The measurements of this key comparison took place from June 2009 to May 2010.
Seventeen laboratories took part in this comparison coordinated by the BIPM and VSL. The key comparison reference value was based on BIPM measurement results, and the standard measurement uncertainty of the reference value was 0.042 µmol/mol.
This key comparison demonstrated that the results of the majority of the participants agreed within limits of ±3% relative to the reference value. The results of only one laboratory lay significantly outside these limits. Likewise this comparison made clear that a full interpretation of the results of the comparison needed to take into account the presence of nitric acid (in the range 100 nmol/mol to 350 nmol/mol) in the cylinders circulated as part of the comparison, as well as the possible presence of nitric acid in the primary standards used by participating laboratories.
Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.
The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).
DatesIssue 1A (Technical Supplement 2012)
This project concerns the purity analysis of nitrogen as used in reference gas mixture preparation. This project was carried out without adding impurities to the gas used for this comparison, and is therefore more representative to evaluate the analysis of CO, CO2, CH4, O2, Ar and H2O impurities in high purity nitrogen. The analysis of the amount–of–substance fraction water was optional.
Two 50 litre high purity nitrogen cylinders were purchased from a well-qualified supplier of specialty gases. The listed components were expected to be present in the pure nitrogen at the target levels as a result of the purification of the nitrogen. From the start of this comparison it was clear that the comparison may not lead to reference values for the constituents analysed.
The results indicate that analyses of high purity gases are often limited by the limits of detection of analytical equipment used. The reports of the participating laboratories also indicate that there is no agreed method of determination of the uncertainty on a detection Limit value. The results provide useful information on the Performance of participants. For all analysed components there is reasonable agreement in results for LNE, VSL, Metas and NPL.
For BAM only the Argon result is in agreement.
This key comparison aims to assess the capabilities of the participants to determine the amount-of-substance fraction oxygen in nitrogen. The GAWG has classified this as a track B comparison, due to the unexpected 50 μmol/mol argon mole fraction content of the transfer standards, which effects the achievable performance of some measurement techniques such a GC-TCD. The separation of oxygen and argon is challenging, and not all systems in use are equally well designed for it. As this analytical challenge due to a substantial fraction of argon in the transfer standards became a reality, the Gas Analysis Working Group (GAWG) decided to qualify this key comparison as a regular key comparison and not as a core comparison, which may be used to support calibration and measurement capabilities (CMCs) for oxygen in nitrogen, or for oxygen in nitrogen mixtures containing argon only (see also the section on support to CMCs).