Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (4)
Schlagworte
- Metrology (2)
- Absolute isotope ratio (1)
- Argon (1)
- Avogadro constant (1)
- CCQM (1)
- Ciaaw.org (1)
- Comparability (1)
- Copper (1)
- Hafnium (1)
- Hyphenated (1)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 1.1 Anorganische Spurenanalytik (4) (entfernen)
ICP-MS has played a key role in inorganic chemical metrology for 25 years, from the 1993 CIPM feasibility study which led to establishment of the CCQM. Since that time, the Inorganic Analysis Working Group of the CCQM has organised 56 international comparisons involving measurements by ICP-MS and, in a recent comparison, 16 different national institutes submitted their results using the technique. Metrological applications of ICP-MS currently address an enormous range of measurements using a wide variety of instrumentation, calibration strategies and methodologies. This review provides an overview of the ICP-MS field with an emphasis on developments which are of particular relevance to chemical metrology.
Examples from CCQM comparisons and the services available from the participants are used to illustrate how the capability and scope of ICP-MS methods have expanded far beyond the expectations of 1993. This is due in part to the research and development Programmes of the national institutes which participate in the CCQM. They have played a key role in advancing new instrumentation and applications for elemental analysis, isotope dilution mass spectrometry, determination of isotopic ratio or composition, and speciation of organometallic compounds. These developments are continuing today, as demonstrated by work in new fields such as heteroatom quantitation of proteins, characterisation and counting of nanoparticles using spICP-MS, and LA-ICP-MS analysis of solid materials.
An international comparison study on the accurate determination of the molar mass M(Si) of silicon artificially enriched in 28Si (x(28Si) > 0.9999 mol mol−1) has been completed. The measurements were part of the high level CCQM-P160 pilot study assessing the ability of National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) and Designated Institutes (DIs) to make such measurements at the lowest possible levels of measurement uncertainty and to identify possible difficulties when measuring this kind of sample. This study supports the molar mass measurements critical to disseminating the silicon route to realizing the new definitions for the kilogram and the mole. Measurements were also made by one external research institute and an external company. The different institutes were free to choose their experimental (mass spectrometric) set-ups and equipment, thereby enabling also the comparison of different techniques. The investigated material was a chemically pure, polycrystalline silicon material. The subsequent modified single crystalline secondary product of this material was intended for the production of silicon which was used for two additional spheres in the context of the redetermination of the Avogadro constant NA, required for the revision of the International System of Units (SI) via fundamental constants which came into force from May 2019. The CCQM pilot study was organized by Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB). Aqueous silicon solutions were shipped to all participating institutions. The data analysis as well as the uncertainty modelling and calculation of the results was predefined. The participants were provided with an uncertainty budget as a GUM Workbench® file as well as a free software license for the duration of the comparison. The agreement of the values of the molar mass (M(Si) = 27.976 942 577 g mol−1) was excellent with ten out of 11 results reported within the range of relative uncertainty of 1 × 10−8 required
for the revision of the SI.
Following the reviews of atomic-weight determinations and other cognate data in 2015, 2017, 2019 and 2021, the IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) Commission on Isotopic Abundances and Atomic Weights (CIAAW) reports changes of standard atomic weights. The symbol Ar(E) was selected for standard atomic weight of an element to distinguish it from the atomic weight of an element E in a specific substance P, designated Ar(E, P). The CIAAW has changed the values of the standard atomic weights of five elements based on recent determinations of terrestrial isotopic abundances:
Ar (argon): from 39.948 ± 0.001 to [39.792, 39.963]
Hf (hafnium): from 178.49 ± 0.02 to 178.486 ± 0.006
Ir (iridium): from 192.217 ± 0.003 to 192.217 ± 0.002
Pb (lead): from 207.2 ± 0.1 to [206.14, 207.94]
Yb (ytterbium): from 173.054 ± 0.005 to 173.045 ± 0.010
The standard atomic weight of argon and lead have changed to an interval to reflect that the natural variation in isotopic composition exceeds the measurement uncertainty of Ar(Ar) and Ar(Pb) in a specific substance. The standard atomic weights and/or the uncertainties of fourteen elements have been changed based on the Atomic Mass Evaluations 2016 and 2020 accomplished under the auspices of the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP). Ar of Ho, Tb, Tm and Y were changed in 2017 and again updated in 2021:
Al (aluminium), 2017: from 26.981 5385 ± 0.000 0007 to 26.981 5384 ± 0.000 0003
Au (gold), 2017: from 196.966 569 ± 0.000 005 to 196.966 570 ± 0.000 004
Co (cobalt), 2017: from 58.933 194 ± 0.000 004 to 58.933 194 ± 0.000 003
F (fluorine), 2021: from 18.998 403 163 ± 0.000 000 006 to 18.998 403 162 ± 0.000 000 005
(Ho (holmium), 2017: from 164.930 33 ± 0.000 02 to 164.930 328 ± 0.000 007)
Ho (holmium), 2021: from 164.930 328 ± 0.000 007 to 164.930 329 ± 0.000 005
Mn (manganese), 2017: from 54.938 044 ± 0.000 003 to 54.938 043 ± 0.000 002
Nb (niobium), 2017: from 92.906 37 ± 0.000 02 to 92.906 37 ± 0.000 01
Pa (protactinium), 2017: from 231.035 88 ± 0.000 02 to 231.035 88 ± 0.000 01
Pr (praseodymium), 2017: from 140.907 66 ± 0.000 02 to 140.907 66 ± 0.000 01
Rh (rhodium), 2017: from 102.905 50 ± 0.000 02 to 102.905 49 ± 0.000 02
Sc (scandium), 2021: from 44.955 908 ± 0.000 005 to 44.955 907 ± 0.000 004
(Tb (terbium), 2017: from 158.925 35 ± 0.000 02 to 158.925 354 ± 0.000 008)
Tb (terbium), 2021: from 158.925 354 ± 0.000 008 to 158.925 354 ± 0.000 007
(Tm (thulium), 2017: from 168.934 22 ± 0.000 02 to 168.934 218 ± 0.000 006)
Tm (thulium), 2021: from 168.934 218 ± 0.000 006 to 168.934 219 ± 0.000 005
(Y (yttrium), 2017: from 88.905 84 ± 0.000 02 to 88.905 84 ± 0.000 01)
Y (yttrium), 2021: from 88.905 84 ± 0.000 01 to 88.905 838 ± 0.000 002
Accurate and precise isotope ratio measurements of heavy elements are playing an increasinglyimportant role in modern analytical sciences and have numerous applications. Today, isotope ratio measurements are typically performed with two principal techniques: thermal ionization mass spectrometry (TIMS) and multiple collector-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS). To obtain accurate results by mass spectrometry, isotopic certified reference materials (iCRMs) are needed for mass bias correction and for the validation of the method used for analysis.Thus, it is of paramount importance to achieve measurement comparability of all data reported, and to assess measurement capability of each CRM producer/National Metrology Institute (NMI). Therefore, the international comparison (CCQM-P213) was performed to assess the analytical capabilities of NMIs for the accurate determination of copper isotope ratio delta values in high purity materials. The study was proposed by the coordinating laboratories, National Research Council Canada (NRC), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung (BAM) and Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), as an activity of the Isotope Ratio Working Group (IRWG) of the Consultative Committee for Amount of Substance - Metrology in Chemistry and Biology (CCQM). Participants included six NMIs and one designated institute (DI) from the six countries. Although no measurement method was prescribed by the coordinating laboratories, MC-ICP-MS with either standard-sample bracketing (SSB) or combined SSB with internal normalization (C-SSBIN) models for mass bias correction were recommended. Results obtained from the six NMIs and one DI were in good agreement.