Ingenieurwissenschaften und zugeordnete Tätigkeiten
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Vortrag (10)
- Zeitschriftenartikel (3)
- Forschungsbericht (2)
- Video (1)
- Posterpräsentation (1)
Sprache
- Englisch (17)
Schlagworte
- Interlaboratory comparison (17) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 6 Materialchemie (11)
- 6.1 Oberflächen- und Dünnschichtanalyse (9)
- 2 Prozess- und Anlagensicherheit (2)
- 2.0 Abteilungsleitung und andere (2)
- 6.5 Synthese und Streuverfahren nanostrukturierter Materialien (2)
- 1 Analytische Chemie; Referenzmaterialien (1)
- 1.2 Biophotonik (1)
- 4 Material und Umwelt (1)
- 4.2 Material-Mikrobiom Wechselwirkungen (1)
- 6.6 Physik und chemische Analytik der Polymere (1)
Eingeladener Vortrag
- nein (10)
There is an urgent demand for reliable data on microplastic analysis, particularly on its physico-chemical properties as well as validated methodology to obtain such data. Through interlaboratory comparisons (ILCs) it becomes possible to assess accuracy and precision of methods by involving many laboratories around the world. At BAM, my tasks focused around organisation of an ILC on physico-chemical characterisation of microplastic detection methods under the international pre-standardisation platform VAMAS (www.vamas.org/twa45/) as Project 2 “Development of standardized methodologies for characterisation of microplastics with microscopy and spectroscopy methods” under the Technical Working Area TWA 45 “Micro and Nano Plastics in the Environment”.
With a proud number of 84 participants this ILC is able to provide superior statistical results. Thermoanalytical (Py-GC/MS and TED-GC/MS) and vibrational (µ-IR and µ-Raman) methods were asked for identification and quantification of microplastic test samples according to mass or particle number. Preliminary results indicate which methods show a higher accuracy and precision and reveal some sample preparation ideas which work best for microplastics characterisation. At the end of the ILC an overall plausibility of the results will be assessed.
The progress of the VAMAS interlaboratory comparison Project P13 "Lateral size of graphene oxide flakes by SEM" within the Technical Working Area 41 "Graphene and Related 2D Materials" is presented. The challenges at sample preparation on substrates for accurate measurement and image analysis as well as two different analysis approaches, containing exact guidance how to measure the main descriptors for the lateral size measurement of the imaged graphene oxide flakes with Scanning Electron Microscopy are highlighted. The implementation of the results into the corresponding ISO technical specification AWI/TS 23879 is also discussed and planned, in relation with the AFM part.
The VAMAS/TWA 45 Project 2 “Development of standardized methodologies for characterisation of microplastics with microscopy and spectroscopy methods” involving 85 participants around the world is primarily discussed with respect to the results received and a first data evaluation. Status of the Project "Guidelines for defining reference materials for plastic degradation in marine environment" is reported and two new project proposals are presented: "Development of standardized methodologies for characterisation of nanoplastics (starting soon, BAM as leader?) and "Development of analytical protocols for the identification and quantification of microplastics of fibrous shape (still in negotiation)".
Due to the extremely high specific surface area of nanoparticles and corresponding potential for adsorption, the results of surface analysis can be highly dependent on the history of the particles, particularly regarding sample preparation and storage. The sample preparation method has, therefore, the potential to have a significant influence on the results. This report describes an interlaboratory comparison (ILC) with the aim of assessing which sample preparation methods for ToF-SIMS analysis of nanoparticles provided the most intra- and interlaboratory consistency and the least amount of sample contamination. The BAM reference material BAM-P110 (TiO2 nanoparticles with a mean Feret diameter of 19 nm) was used as a sample representing typical nanoparticles. A total of 11 participants returned ToF-SIMS data,in positive and (optionally) negative polarity, using sample preparation methods of “stick-and-go” as well as optionally “drop-dry” and “spin-coat.” The results showed that the largest sources of variation within the entire data set were caused by adventitious hydrocarbon contamination or insufficient sample coverage, with the spin-coating protocol applied in this ILC showing a tendency toward insufficient sample coverage; the sample preparation method or the participant had a lesser influence on results.
International standards describing reliable protocols will facilitate the commercialization of graphene and related 2D materials. One physico-chemical key property next to flake size and thickness is the chemical composition of the material. Therefore, an ISO standard is under development with X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy having a prominent role. With its information depth of around 10 nm which is the similar length scale as the thickness as of particles of 2D materials consisting of a few monolayer XPS seems to be highly suitable for this purpose. Different sample preparation methods like pressing the powders onto adhesive tapes, into recesses, or into solid pellets result in inconsistencies in the quantification. For the validation of the quantification with XPS an interlaboratory comparison was initiated under the auspice of the “Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards” (VAMAS). First results confirm that the sample preparation method (pellet vs. powder) influences the quantification results clearly.
International standards describing reliable protocols will facilitate the commercialization of graphene and related 2D materials. One physico-chemical key property next to flake size and thickness is the chemical composition of the material. Therefore, an ISO standard is under development with X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy having a prominent role. With its information depth of around 10 nm which is the similar length scale as the thickness as of particles of 2D materials consisting of a few monolayer XPS seems to be highly suitable for this purpose. Different sample preparation methods like pressing the powders onto adhesive tapes, into recesses, or into solid pellets result in inconsistencies in the quantification. For the validation of the quantification with XPS an interlaboratory comparison was initiated under the auspice of the “Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards” (VAMAS). First results confirm that the sample preparation method (pellet vs. powder) influences the quantification results clearly. Considering this effect, a good agreement of the results from the different participants were observed. Similar results were observed for raw, N- and F-functionalized graphene.
Since its isolation, graphene has received growing attention from academia and industry due to its unique properties. Promising opportunities for applications are discussed in different field like electronics and optoelectronics, detection, and sensing devices, biosystems or chemical and environmental corrosion inhibition. Here, functionalization with elements like oxygen, nitrogen or fluorine can broaden the application, for example in composite materials. However, lack of generally accepted operation procedures hinders the commercialization, the so-called “what is my material” barrier. Therefore, first efforts were done to develop common, reliable, and reproducible ways to characterize the morphological and chemical properties of the industrially produced material.
In this contribution, our efforts in the development of reliable chemical characterizations protocols for functionalized graphene are presented. An ISO standard for the chemical characterization of graphene-related (GRM) is under development with X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) having a prominent role. With its information depth of around 10 nm, which is the similar length scale as the thickness of particles of 2D materials consisting of a few monolayers, XPS seems to be highly suitable for the quantitative analysis of (functionalized) GRM. Thereby, different sample preparation methods like pressing the powders onto adhesive tapes, into recesses, or into solid pellets result in inconsistencies in the quantification. Furthermore, different morphologies like stacks of graphene layers (left figure) or irregular particles (right figure) lead to different analysis results for the chemical composition.
For the validation of the quantification with XPS and the further development of standards an international interlaboratory comparison was initiated under the head of the “Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards” (VAMAS). First results are reported showing the suitability of the protocols. Finally, the XPS results are compared with the elemental composition results obtained after quantification with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) as a fast analytical method which is usually combined with electron microscopy.
Following points are presented and discussed: i) nPSize as an EMPIR project on the nanoparticle size and shape distribution of (more) complex particles including sample preparation and machine learning approaches; ii) parallel development of ISO 21363 (PSSD by TEM), ISO 19749 (PSSD by SEM), ISO 22292 (3D TEM), ISO 52408 (NP Prep for AFM and EM), iii) VAMAS and pre-standardisation, TWA 34 „Nanoparticle Populations“ with two nPSize ILC projects P15 & P16 – results to be published and integrated in ISO 21363 (PSSD by TEM); iv) Remaining challenges: platelets, 2D materials (TiO2 and GR2M); v) Reference data sets as part of a complete Characterisation Workflow.
The surface chemistry of nanomaterials controls their interaction with the environment and biological species and their fate and is hence also relevant for their potential toxicity. This has meanwhile led to an increasing interest in validated and preferably standardized methods for the determination and quantification of surface functionalities on nanomaterials and initiated different standardization projects within ISO/TC 229 and IEC/TC 113 as well as interlaboratory comparisons (ILCs) of different analytical methods for the quantification of surface coatings by OECD. Here we present the results of a first ILC on the quantification of the amount of amino functionalities on differently sized inorganic nanoparticles done by division Biophotonics and the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) and the PWI 19257 on the Characterization and Quantification of Surface Functional Groups and Coatings on Nanoobjects approved by ISO/TC 229 (WG2) in fall 2022 that will result in a VAMAS study on this topic organized by division Biophotonics. Key words: nanoparticles, surface analysis, surface functional groups, quantification, optical assay, qNMR, VAMAS, standardization, ICL, quality assurance, reference material.
This is a remote presentation I gave at the 2022 Small-angle Scattering conference in Campinas, Brazil. The video has been obtained from the conference organisers with their explicit permission for use on YouTube. I've tried to spruce up the audio from the remote recording the best I could.
The conference abstract for this talk was:
"How much do we, the small-angle scatterers, influence the results of an investigation? What uncertainty do we add by our human diversity in thoughts and approaches, and is this significant compared to the uncertainty from the instrumental measurement factors?
After our previous Round Robin on data collection, we know that many laboratories can collect reasonably consistent small-angle scattering data on easy samples[1]. To investigate the next, human component, we compiled four existing datasets from globular (roughly spherical) scatterers, each exhibiting a common complication, and asked the participants to apply their usual methods and toolset to the quantification of the results (https://lookingatnothing.com/index.ph....
Accompanying the datasets was a modicum of accompanying information to help with the interpretation of the data, similar to what we normally receive from our collaborators. More than 30 participants reported back with volume fractions, mean sizes and size distribution widths of the particle populations in the samples, as well as information on their self-assessed level of experience and years in the field.
While the Round Robin is still underway (until the 25th of April, 2022), the initial results already show significant spread in the results. Some of these are due to the variety in interpretation of the meaning of the requested parameters, as well as simple human errors, both of which are easy to correct for. Nevertheless, even after correcting for these differences in understanding, a significant spread remains. This highlights an urgent challenge to our community: how can we better help ourselves and our colleagues obtain more reliable results, how could we take the human factor out of the equation, so to speak?
In this talk, we will introduce the four datasets, their origins and challenges. Hot off the press, we will summarize the anonymized, quantified results of the Data Analysis Round Robin. (Incidentally, we will also see if a correlation exists between experience and proximity of the result to the median). Lastly, potential avenues for improving our field will be offered based on the findings, ranging from low-effort yet somehow controversial improvements, to high-effort foundational considerations."
How much do we, the small-angle scatterers, influence the results of an investigation? What uncertainty do we add by our human diversity in thoughts and approaches, and is this significant compared to the uncertainty from the instrumental measurement factors?
After our previous Round Robin on data collection, we know that many laboratories can collect reasonably consistent small-angle scattering data on easy samples1. To investigate the next, human component, we compiled four existing datasets from globular (roughly spherical) scatterers, each exhibiting a common complication, and asked the participants to apply their usual methods and toolset to the quantification of the results https://lookingatnothing.com/index.php/archives/3274).
Accompanying the datasets was a modicum of accompanying information to help with the interpretation of the data, similar to what we normally receive from our collaborators. More than 30 participants reported back with volume fractions, mean sizes and size distribution widths of the particle populations in the samples, as well as information on their self-assessed level of experience and years in the field.
While the Round Robin is still underway (until the 25th of April, 2022), the initial results already show significant spread in the results. Some of these are due to the variety in interpretation of the meaning of the requested parameters, as well as simple human errors, both of which are easy to correct for. Nevertheless, even after correcting for these differences in understanding, a significant spread remains. This highlights an urgent challenge to our community: how can we better help ourselves and our colleagues obtain more reliable results, how could we take the human factor out of the equation, so to speak?
In this talk, we will introduce the four datasets, their origins and challenges. Hot off the press, we will summarize the anonymized, quantified results of the Data Analysis Round Robin. (Incidentally, we will also see if a correlation exists between experience and proximity of the result to the median). Lastly, potential avenues for improving our field will be offered based on the findings, ranging from low-effort yet somehow controversial improvements, to high-effort foundational considerations.
Emission testing of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from materials and products is commonly based on emission test chamber measurements. To ensure the comparability of results from different testing laboratories, their measurement performance must be verified. For this purpose, Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung (BAM) organizes an international proficiency test (round robin test, RRT) every two years using well-characterized test materials (one sealant, one furniture board, and four times a lacquer) with defined VOC emissions. The materials fulfilled the requirements of homogeneity, reproducibility, and stability. Altogether, 36 VOCs were included of which 33 gave test chamber air concentrations between 13 and 83 µg/m3. This is the typical concentration range to be expected and to be quantified when performing chamber tests. Three compounds had higher concentrations between 326 and 1105 µg/m3. In this paper, the relative standard deviations (RSD) of BAM round robin tests since 2008 are compared and the improvement of the comparability of the emission chamber testing is shown by the decrease of the mean RSD down to 28 % in 2018. In contrast, the first large European interlaboratory comparison in 1999 showed a mean RSD of 51 %.
CEQAT-DGHS Interlaboratory tests for method validation and measurement uncertainty determination
(2019)
An explosion in a chemical plant or a fire on a dangerous goods vessel - the reason for such accidents can be numerous. Prevention starts in the laboratory where chemicals are tested for their hazardous properties in order to be able to assess the risks involved in their handling. For this purpose, test methods have been developed and published. They are applied globally nowadays. Safety experts, manufacturers, suppliers, importers, employers or consumers must be able to rely on the validity of safety-related test methods and on correct test results and assessments in the laboratory.
Interlaboratory tests play a decisive role in assessing the reliability of test results. Participation in interlaboratory tests is not only a crucial element of the quality assurance of laboratories; as such it is explicitly recommended in DIN EN ISO/IEC 17025. In addition, interlaboratory tests are also used to develop and validate test methods and can be used for the determination of the measurement uncertainty.
Interlaboratory tests on different test methods have been performed by Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und –prüfung (BAM) and Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) in collaboration with the QuoData GmbH during the last 10 years. Significant differences between the results of the participating laboratories were observed in all interlaboratory tests. The deviations of the test results were not caused only by laboratory faults but also by deficiencies of the test method (see interlaboratory test reports of the CEQAT-DGHS Centre for quality assurance for testing of dangerous goods and hazardous substances: www.ceqat-dghs.bam.de).
In view of the interlaboratory test results the following conclusions can be drawn:
• To avoid any discrepancy on classification and labelling of chemicals it should become state of the art to use validated test methods and the results accompanied by the measurement uncertainty.
• A need for improvement is demonstrated for all examined test methods. Thus, interlaboratory tests shall initially aim at the development, improvement and validation of the test methods (including the determination of the measurement uncertainty) and not on proficiency tests.
• The laboratory management and the practical execution of the tests need to be improved in many laboratories.
• The term "experience of the examiner" must be seen critically: A "long experience with many tests" is not necessarily a guarantee for correct results.
CEQAT-DGHS Interlaboratory Test Programme for Chemical Safety - Need of Test Methods Validation
(2019)
Safety experts, manufacturers, suppliers, importers, employers or consumers must be able to rely on the validity of safety-related test methods and on correct test results and assessments in the laboratory. Via the eChemPortal lots of data from the REACH registration dossiers are available. However, the quality and correctness of the information remains in the responsibility of the data submitter. Unfortunately, we found more or less appropriate information on physicochemical properties and concluded that more quality or adequacy of any data submitted will be needed.
Interlaboratory tests play a decisive role in assessing the reliability of test results. Interlaboratory tests on different test methods have been performed by Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und –prüfung (BAM) and Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) in collaboration with the QuoData GmbH during the last 10 years. Significant differences between the results of the participating laboratories were observed in all interlaboratory tests. The deviations of the test results were not caused only by laboratory faults but also by deficiencies of the test method.
In view of the interlaboratory test results the following conclusions can be drawn:
• To avoid any discrepancy on classification and labelling of chemicals it should become state of the art to use validated test methods and the results accompanied by the measurement uncertainty.
• A need for improvement is demonstrated for all examined test methods. Thus, interlaboratory tests shall initially aim at the development, improvement and validation of the test methods and not on proficiency tests.
• The laboratory management and the practical execution of the tests need to be improved in many laboratories.
• The term "experience of the examiner" must be seen critically: A "long experience with many tests" is not necessarily a guarantee for correct results.
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.
For the classification, safe handling and use of the chemicals, special standardized testing procedures have been developed and are used worldwide. Safety experts must be able to fully rely on the precise execution of the respective laboratory tests and assessments. In this context, interlaboratory tests 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 the results of the interlaboratory test 2015-2016, which was performed on the test method DIN EN 15188:2007 “Determination of the spontaneous ignition behaviour of dust accumulations”. It was organized by BAM in the frame of the co-operation project CEQAT-DGHS Centre for Quality Assurance for Testing of Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Substances.
The test method DIN EN 15188:2007 is applied to characterize the self-ignition behaviour of combustible dusts. The experimental basis for describing the self-ignition behaviour of a given dust is the determination of the self-ignition temperatures (TSI) of differently-sized volumes of the dust sample by isoperibolic hot storage experiments (storage at constant oven temperatures) in commercially available ovens. The results measured this way reflect the dependence of the self-ignition temperatures on the volume of a dust accumulation.
The interlaboratory test 2015-2016 on the method DIN EN 15188:2007 is the latest in a systematic stepwise built up series of method validation interlaboratory tests and internal laboratory investigations. The aim of this interlaboratory test was to determine measurement uncertainties of the modified method DIN EN 15188 for different substances, covering a sufficiently wide range of self-ignition behaviours in the scope of the DIN EN 15188 of the four basket test to extrapolate to storage volumes up to 1000 m³ and the single basket test for a basket volume of 1000 cm³.
The precision of the four basket test and the single basket of the modified method DIN EN 15188 can be assessed as acceptable for the four sample materials investigated in the current interlaboratory test 2015-2016. It was possible to derive a functional equation for the measurement uncertainty U depending on the storage volume V. The measurement uncertainty cannot be ignored and must be considered, if TSI results should be used in practice.