Wissenschaftliche Artikel der BAM
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (3)
Referierte Publikation
- ja (3)
Schlagworte
- Uncertainty (3) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 1 Analytische Chemie; Referenzmaterialien (3) (entfernen)
Scattering luminescent materials dispersed in liquid and solid matrices and luminescent powders are increasingly relevant for fundamental research and industry. Examples are luminescent nano- and microparticles and phosphors of different compositions in various matrices or incorporated into ceramics with applications in energy conversion, solid-state lighting, medical diagnostics, and security barcoding. The key parameter to characterize the performance of these materials is the photoluminescence/fluorescence quantum yield (Φf), i.e., the number of emitted photons per number of absorbed photons. To identify and quantify the sources of uncertainty of absolute measurements of Φf of scattering samples, the first interlaboratory comparison (ILC) of three laboratories from academia and industry was performed by following identical measurement protocols. Thereby, two types ofcommercial stand-alone integrating sphere setups with different illumination and detection geometries were utilized for measuring the Φf of transparent and scattering dye solutions and solid phosphors, namely, YAG:Ce optoceramics of varying surface roughness, used as converter materials for blue light emitting diodes. Special emphasis was dedicated to the influence of the measurement geometry, the optical properties of the blank utilized to determine the number of photons of the incident excitation light absorbed by the sample, and the sample-specific surface roughness. While the Φf values of the liquid samples matched between instruments, Φf measurements of the optoceramics with different blanks revealed substantial differences. The ILC results underline the importance of the measurement geometry, sample position, and blank for reliable Φf data of scattering the YAG:Ce optoceramics, with the blank’s optical properties accounting for uncertainties exceeding 20%.
The present Table of Standard Atomic Weights (TSAW) of the elements is perhaps one of the most familiar data sets in science. Unlike most parameters in physical science whose values and uncertainties are evaluated using the “Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement” (GUM), the majority of standard atomic weight values and their uncertainties are consensus values, not GUM-evaluated values. The Commission on Isotopic Abundances and Atomic Weights of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) regularly evaluates the literature for new isotopic-abundance measurements that can lead to revised standard atomic-weight values, Ar(E) for element E.
The Commission strives to provide utmost clarity in products it disseminates, namely the TSAW and the Table of Isotopic Compositions of the Elements (TICE). In 2016, the Commission recognized that a guideline recommending the expression of uncertainty listed in parentheses following the standard atomic-weight value, for example, Ar(Se) = 78.971(8), did not agree with the GUM, which suggests that this parenthetic notation be reserved to express standard uncertainty, not the expanded uncertainty used in the TSAW and TICE. In 2017, to eliminate this noncompliance with the GUM, a new format was adopted in which the uncertainty value is specified by the “±” symbol, for example, Ar(Se) = 78.971 ± 0.008. To clarify the definition of uncertainty, a new footnote has been added to the TSAW. This footnote emphasizes that an atomic-weight uncertainty is a consensus (decisional) uncertainty. Not only has the Commission shielded users of the TSAW and TICE from unreliable measurements that appear in the literature as a result of unduly small uncertainties, but the aim of IUPAC has been fulfilled by which any scientist, taking any natural sample from commerce or research, can expect the sample atomic weight to lie within Ar(E) ± its uncertainty almost all of the time.
The theory of a new calibration approach for obtaining absolute isotope ratios of multi-isotopic elements without the use of any standard has been developed. The calibration approach basically uses the difference in the instrumental isotope fractionation of two different types of mass spectrometers, leading to two different fractionation lines in a three-isotope diagram. When measuring the same sample with both mass spectrometers, the different fractionation lines have one point in common: this is the ‘true’ logarithmized isotope ratio pair of the sample. Thus, the intersection of both fractionation lines provides us with the absolute isotope ratios of the sample. This theory has been tested in practice by measuring Cd and of Pb isotope ratios in the certified reference materials BAM-I012 and NIST SRM981 by thermal ionization mass spectrometry and by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry while varying the ionization conditions for both mass spectrometers. With this experiment, the theory could be verified, and absolute isotope ratios were obtained, which were metrologically compatible with the certified isotope ratios. The so-obtained absolute isotope ratios are biased by − 0.5% in average, which should be improved with further developments of the method. This calibration approach is universal, as it can be applied to all elements with three or more isotopes and it is not limited to the type of mass spectrometers applied; it can be applied as well to secondary ion mass spectrometry or others. Additionally, this approach provides information on the fractionation process itself via the triple-isotope fractionation exponent θ.