Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
Schlagworte
- Gefahrgut (9)
- Prüfmethode (9)
- Dangerous goods (7)
- Test method (7)
- Gefahrstoff (6)
- Qualitätssicherung (6)
- Ringversuch (5)
- Validierung (5)
- Hazardous substances (4)
- Leaching (4)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
The test methods UN Test L.2 / EN ISO 9038:2013 DIN EN 15188:2007 are applied to characterize the sustained combustibility of liquids i.e. the behaviour of a material under specified test conditions, whereby its vapour can be ignited by an ignition source and sufficient flammable vapour is produced to continue burning for at least 15 s after the source of ignition has been removed.
The aims of this interlaboratory test (IT) are the verification and/or the improvement (if necessary) of the verification data (reference material) in Annex B of EN ISO 9038:2013, the assessment of influencing (disturbing) factors (laboratory specific factors, which possibly may have an influence on the test result) and the assessment of the performance of the participating laboratories.
It could be demonstrated that the reference materials n-Dodecane, n-Decane and n-Undecane as mentioned in the standard are suitable and the verification shall continue to be valid.
Sustained combustibility tests are influenced by several factors like the presence of a draught shield, the experience of the laboratory assistant, verification of the apparatus, calibration of the metering device.
Based on the interlaboratory test, the gained experience and the actual results, well-founded measures / actions can be recommended to improve execution of the method.
The IT was organized by PTB, BAM and QuoData GmbH in the framework of the co-operation project CEQAT-DGHS Centre for Quality Assurance for Testing of Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Substances.
Bei der Bewertung der Verlässlichkeit der im Labor gewonnenen Prüfergebnisse spielen Ringversuche eine entscheidende Rolle. Die Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und –prüfung (BAM) unterstützt deshalb den weiteren Ausbau des Ringversuchsprogramms des im Jahr 2007 gegründeten Kompetenzzentrums zur Qualitätssicherung für Prüfungen von Gefahrgütern und Gefahrstoffen auf physikalische Gefahren (Centre for quality assurance for testing of dangerous goods and hazardous substances, CEQAT-DGHS).
Bei allen bisher untersuchten Prüfmethoden besteht ein Verbesserungsbedarf. Die RV müssen daher zunächst auf die Methodenentwicklung, -verbesserung und -validierung und auf die Bestimmung der Messunsicherheit der jeweiligen Prüfmethode abzielen und nicht auf Leistungstests.
Bei der Bewertung der Verlässlichkeit der im Labor gewonnenen Prüfergebnisse spielen Ringversuche eine entscheidende Rolle. Die Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und –prüfung (BAM) unterstützt deshalb den weiteren Ausbau des Ringversuchsprogramms des im Jahr 2007 gegründeten Kompetenzzentrums zur Qualitätssicherung für Prüfungen von Gefahrgütern und Gefahrstoffen auf physikalische Gefahren (Centre for quality assurance for testing of dangerous goods and hazardous substances, CEQAT-DGHS).
Bei allen bisher untersuchten Prüfmethoden besteht ein Verbesserungsbedarf. Die RV müssen daher zunächst auf die Methodenentwicklung, -verbesserung und -validierung und auf die Bestimmung der Messunsicherheit der jeweiligen Prüfmethode abzielen und nicht auf Leistungstests.
Leaching processes are responsible for the release of biocides from treated materials into the environment.
Adequate modeling of emission processes is required in order to predict emission values in the framework of the risk assessment of biocidal products intended for long-term service life. Regression approaches have been applied to data obtained from the long-term monitoring of biocide emissions in experiments involving semi-field conditions. Due to the complex interaction of different underlying mechanisms such as water and biocide diffusion and desorption, however, these attempts have proven to be of limited usefulness e at least, for the available biocide emission data. It seems that the behavior of the biocide emission curve depends to a considerable extent on whichever underlying mechanism is slowest at a given point in time, thus limiting the amount of biocide available for release. Building on results obtained in the past few years, the authors propose a criterion for determining which mechanism controls the leaching process at a given point in time based on the slope of the log-log emission curve. In addition, a first-order approximation of this slope value is presented which displays advantages both in terms of computability and interpretability. Finally, an algorithm for the determination of breakpoints in the slope of the log-log emission curve is presented for the demarcation of phases within which one mechanism acts as a limiting factor.
Die Ursachen für Chemikalienunfälle können vielfältig sein. Prävention beginnt bereits im Prüflabor, wenn Chemikalien auf ihre gefährlichen Eigenschaften getestet werden. Dazu sind Prüfmethoden entwickelt und veröffentlicht worden, die heute weltweit Anwendung finden. Auf die Validität der Prüfmethode und richtige Durchführung der Prüfung im Laboratorium müssen sich Sicherheitsfachkräfte, Transporteure oder Händler verlassen können. Anhand der in den letzten 10 Jahren im Rahmen des CEQAT-DGHS von BAM und PTB durchgeführten Ringversuche (RV) wird gezeigt, dass bei allen bisher untersuchten Prüfmethoden ein Verbesserungsbedarf besteht. Die RV müssen daher zunächst auf die Methodenverbesserung und -validierung abzielen und nicht auf Leistungstests. Das Labormanagement und die praktische Durchführung der Prüfung sind in vielen Laboratorien verbesserungsbedürftig. Der Begriff „Erfahrung der Prüfer“ ist kritisch zu sehen: Eine „lange Erfahrung mit vielen Prüfungen“ ist nicht unbedingt ein Garant für richtige Ergebnisse.
Prävention beginnt im Prüflabor, wenn Chemikalien auf ihre gefährlichen Eigenschaften getestet werden. Dazu sind Prüfmethoden entwickelt und veröffentlicht worden, die heute weltweit Anwendung finden. Auf die Validität der Prüfmethode und richtige Durchführung der Prüfung im Laboratorium müssen sich Sicherheitsfachkräfte, Transporteure oder Händler verlassen können. Anhand der in den letzten 10 Jahren im Rahmen des CEQAT-DGHS von BAM und PTB durchgeführten Ringversuche (RV) wird gezeigt, dass bei allen bisher untersuchten Prüfmethoden ein Verbesserungsbedarf besteht. Die RV müssen daher zunächst auf die Methodenverbesserung und -validierung abzielen und nicht auf Leistungstests. Das Labormanagement und die praktische Durchführung der Prüfung sind in vielen Laboratorien verbesserungsbedürftig. Der Begriff „Erfahrung der Prüfer“ ist kritisch zu sehen: Eine „lange Erfahrung mit vielen Prüfungen“ ist nicht unbedingt ein Garant für richtige Ergebnisse. Bei der Prüfung der gefährlichen Eigenschaften von Chemikalien sind Referenzmaterialen auf Grund der Instabilität in der Regel nicht verfügbar. Für Prüflaboratorien sind RV daher eine Alternative bei der Qualitätssicherung. RV sind jedoch aufwendig und können nur in relativ großen Zeitabständen durchgeführt werden. Es sind deshalb Verfahren zur Verifizierung z. B. der in den Laboratorien verwendeten Prüfapparaturen zu entwickeln. Die Entwicklung von Verifizierungsverfahren wird am Bespiel der Prüfmethode UN Test N.5 demonstriert.
Laboratory test results are of vital importance for correctly classifying and labelling chemicals as “hazardous” as defined in the UN Globally Harmonized System (GHS) / EC CLP Regulation or as “dangerous goods” as defined in the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. Interlaboratory tests play a decisive role in assessing the reliability of laboratory test results. Interlaboratory tests performed over the last 10 years have examined different laboratory test methods. After analysing the results of these interlaboratory tests, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. There is a need for improvement and validation for all laboratory test methods examined.
2. To avoid any discrepancy concerning the classification and labelling of chemicals, the use of validated laboratory test methods should be state of the art, with the results accompanied by the measurement uncertainty and (if applicable) the probability of incorrect classification.
This paper addresses the probability of correct/incorrect classification (for example, as dangerous goods) on the basis of the measurement deviation obtained from interlaboratory tests performed by the Centre for quality assurance for testing of dangerous goods and hazardous substances (CEQAT-DGHS) to validate laboratory test methods. This paper outlines typical results (e.g. so-called “Shark profiles” – the probability of incorrect classification as a function of the true value estimated from interlaboratory test data) as well as general conclusions and steps to be taken to guarantee that laboratory test results are fit for purpose and of high quality.
Laboratory test results are of vital importance for correctly classifying and labelling chemicals as “hazardous” as defined in the UN Globally Harmonized System (GHS) / EC CLP Regulation or as “dangerous goods” as defined in the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. Interlaboratory tests play a decisive role in assessing the reliability of laboratory test results. Interlaboratory tests performed over the last 10 years have examined different laboratory test methods. After analysing the results of these interlaboratory tests, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. There is a need for improvement and validation for all laboratory test methods examined.
2. To avoid any discrepancy concerning the classification and labelling of chemicals, the use of validated laboratory test methods should be state of the art, with the results accompanied by the measurement uncertainty and (if applicable) the probability of incorrect classification.
This paper addresses the probability of correct/incorrect classification (for example, as dangerous goods) on the basis of the measurement deviation obtained from interlaboratory tests performed by the Centre for quality assurance for testing of dangerous goods and hazardous substances (CEQAT-DGHS) to validate laboratory test methods. This paper outlines typical results (e.g. so-called “Shark profiles” – the probability of incorrect classification as a function of the true value estimated from interlaboratory test data) as well as general conclusions and steps to be taken to guarantee that laboratory test results are fit for purpose and of high quality.
For the classification of chemicals, special standardized test procedures have been developed and are used world-wide. Safe handling and use of these chemicals depend on the correct classification which therefore must be based on the precise and correct execution of the tests and their evaluation. In this context interlaboratory tests (round robin tests, interlaboratory comparisons / intercomparisons) are a crucial element of a laboratory's quality system. Participation in interlaboratory tests is explicitly recommended by the standard ISO/IEC 17025.
The present document reports on the results of the interlaboratory test 2009/2010 on the test methods UN O.2 “Test for oxidizing liquids” [1] / EC A.21 “Oxidizing Properties (Liquids)” [2] which was organized by the Center for Quality Assurance for Testing of Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Substances.
The test methods UN O.2 and EC A.21 are applied to characterize the oxidizing properties of liquid chemical substances or mixtures. To differentiate between chemicals with hazardous / dangerous oxidizing properties and chemicals which are not classified as hazardous / dangerous, the substance’s oxidizing properties are compared to those of a standard reference substance.
Since the methods (UN O.2 / EC A.21) were developed and came into force in the early nineties a systematic review concerning the practical application of the test method has not been carried out.
The classification of solid oxidizers according to the GHS (Globally Harmonized System of Classifica-tion and Labelling of Chemicals) and according to regulations on the transport of dangerous goods (based on the UN Recommendations/Model Regulations and implemented in all carrier domains as transport by road, railway, sea, air) is performed on the basis of the results of the UN test O.1 (―Test for oxidizing solids‖ described in chapter 34.4.1 in the Recommendations on the Transport of Danger-ous Goods, Manual of Tests and Criteria, Fifth revised edition, United Nations, New York and Geneva, 2009). This test was introduced into the UN Test Manual in 1995 as a replacement for a similar test from 1986. Even though the O.1 test is much better than the previous one there are still many prob-lems with this test. For this reason the IGUS-EOS working group (international group of experts on the explosion risks of unstable substances – working group: energetic and oxidizing substances) installed an ad-hoc working group in 2002 assigned with the task of proposing solutions for the existing prob-lems. The adequacy of such proposals has to be proven preferably by interlaboratory comparison (interlaboratory test) before they are presented to the UN Sub Committee for adoption into the UN Test Manual. The present report is the evaluation of an interlaboratory test which was designed by the Ad-hoc working group in order to find out whether the current method of comparing combustion times of test mixtures with those of reference mixtures is suitable in principle and whether some approaches for improvement of the method can be identified.