Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (12)
- Vortrag (2)
- Forschungsdatensatz (1)
Sprache
- Englisch (15)
Schlagworte
- Traceability (6)
- Absolute isotope ratio (4)
- Measurement uncertainty (4)
- Metrology (4)
- Isotope ratios (3)
- Biodiesel fuel (2)
- Cement (2)
- Comparability (2)
- Delta scale (2)
- Geological material (2)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 1.1 Anorganische Spurenanalytik (15) (entfernen)
Eingeladener Vortrag
- nein (2)
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.
The continuous improvement of analytical procedures using multi-collector technologies in ICP-mass spectrometry has led to an increased demand for isotope standards with improved homogeneity and reduced measurement uncertainty. For magnesium, this has led to a variety of available standards with different quality levels ranging from artefact standards to isotope reference materials certified for absolute isotope ratios. This required an intercalibration of all standards and reference materials, which we present in this interlaboratory comparison study. The materials Cambridge1, DSM3, ERMAE143, ERM-AE144, ERM-AE145, IRMM-009 and NIST SRM 980 were cross-calibrated with expanded measurement uncertainties (95% confidence level) of less than 0.030‰ for the δ25/24Mg values and less than 0.037‰ for the δ26/24Mg values. Thus, comparability of all magnesium isotope delta (δ) measurements based on these standards and reference materials is established. Further, ERM-AE143 anchors all magnesium δ-scales to absolute isotope ratios and therefore establishes SI traceability, here traceability to the SI base unit mole. This applies especially to the DSM3 scale, which is proposed to be maintained. With ERM-AE144 and ERM-AE145, which are product and educt of a sublimation-condensation process, for the first time a set of isotope reference materials is available with a published value for the apparent triple isotope fractionation exponent θapp, the fractionation relationship ln α(25/24Mg)/ln α(26/24Mg).
Isotope ratio applications are on the increase and a major part of which are delta measurements, because they are easier to perform than the determination of absolute isotope ratios while offering lower measurement uncertainties. Delta measurements use artefact-based scales and therefore scale conversions are required due to the lack of the scale defining standards. Such scale conversions often form the basis for comparing data being generated in numerous projects andtherefore need to be as accurate as possible. In practice, users are tempted to apply linear approximations, which are not sufficiently exact, because delta values are defined by nonlinear relationships. The bias of such approximations often is beyond typical measurement uncertainties and its extent can hardly be predicted. Therefore, exact calculations are advised. Here, the exact equations and the bias of the approximations are presented, and calculations are illustrated by real-world examples. Measurement uncertainty is indispensable in this context and therefore, its calculation is described as well for determining delta values but also for scale conversions. Approaches for obtaining a single delta measurement and for repeated measurements are presented. For the latter case, a new approach for calculating the measurement uncertainty is presented, which considers covariances between the isotope ratios.
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.
The Uncertainty Paradox: Molar Mass of Enriched Versus Natural Silicon Used in the XRCD Method
(2020)
The X-ray crystal density method uses silicon spheres highly enriched in 28Si as a primary method for the dissemination of the SI base unit kilogram yielding smallest possible uncertainties associated with the mass m within a few parts in 10-8. This study compares different available and newly developed analytical methods and their results for the determination of the molar mass M of silicon highly enriched in 28Si (Me) and of silicon (Mx) with an almost natural isotopic distribution. While for Me relative uncertainties urel(Me) in the lower 10-9 range are obtained routinely, it was not possible to fall below a value of urel(Mx) < 4 x 10-6 in the case of natural silicon, which is approximately three orders of magnitude larger. The application of the state-of the-art isotope ratio mass spectrometry accompanied with sophisticated thoroughly investigated methods suggests an intrinsic cause for the large uncertainty associated with the molar mass of natural silicon compared to the enriched material.