Reference materials ; rock samples SY-2, SY-3, MRG-1

Abbey, Sydney

doi:10.4095/307189

Cited by 22 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As has been observed, the values obtained by the proposed method for Fe(III) as Fe 2 O 3 in one of the certified reference materials (SY‐2) were found slightly higher than those reported (certified values) in line with that observed for the results obtained from the titrimetric method. However, values obtained by us compare favourably with those reported independently by other workers by applying different methods on the same reference material (SY‐2) (Abbey ).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

An Optimised 1,10‐Phenanthroline Method for the Determination of Ferrous and Ferric Oxides in Silicate Rocks, Soils and Minerals

Tarafder¹,

Thakur²

2013

Geostandard Geoanalytic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A precise, accurate and rapid method for the sequential determination of FeO and Fe 2 O 3 in rocks, soils and some non-refractory minerals by 1,10-phenanthroline spectrophotometry is described. Fe(II) and Fe(III) were leached from the sample (-200 mesh) using a mixture of NH 4 HF 2 and H 2 SO 4 at 40-80°C for 10 min on a hot plate. Both Fe(II) and Fe(III) could be conveniently estimated sequentially from the same reaction mixture at the lg g -1 to percentage level. The method is better than the existing wet chemical methods, including the commonly used Pratt's titrimetric redox method, for Fe(II) and Fe(III) determinations in rock and soil samples in terms of precision, accuracy and rapidity. The throughput of the method was very high; at least forty to fifty samples could be estimated easily in a day. The results obtained compare favourably with those obtained by Pratt's method, as well as for certified/recommended values of a set of eleven certified reference materials having FeO and Fe 2 O 3 contents in the range 0.21-14.63% and 0.58-8.48%, respectively. The optimised 1,10 phenanthroline method was found to be accurate to within 0.21% m/m FeO and 0.30% m/m Fe 2 O 3 compared with the literature values of the certified reference materials studied.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

An Optimised 1,10‐Phenanthroline Method for the Determination of Ferrous and Ferric Oxides in Silicate Rocks, Soils and Minerals

Tarafder¹,

Thakur²

2013

Geostandard Geoanalytic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…e resulting statistical information after the application of well-known discordancy tests at the strict 99% confidence level (mean and uncertainty values rounded according to the flexible rules [18]) is listed in Table S2. ese GRM compositional data showed by far the lowest 99% uncertainty (Table S2), much lower than any existing compilation [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47]55]. We may also stress once again that this was achieved through an objective combination of discordancy tests having the highest performance and lowest swamping and masking effects [17,18,48,53], i.e., from the methodology having the lowest type I and type II errors and the highest power.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Major Element Data For Grmsmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…e procedure blank was a pellet prepared in duplicate with only pure N,N′-Ethylene bis(stearamide) beads without any sample (Section 3). e individual data reported in earlier compilations [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47] were first compiled in new databases.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Major Element Data For Grmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some or all of these assumptions are violated in most instrumental calibrations through the OLR model. us, from the literature on the GRMs, it has been demonstrated that the concentration axis is not error-free (see non-zero uncertainties for all GRM concentrations in Table S2) [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][51][52][53]. One can also clearly see that the errors in the intensity axis are not homoscedastic (see unequal, i.e., heteroscedastic uncertainties for any element in different GRMs in Table S2).…”

Section: Regression Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Statistically Coherent Calibration of X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry for Major Elements in Rocks and Minerals

Verma

Rivera-Gómez

et al. 2018

Journal of Spectroscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We applied both the ordinary linear regression (OLR) and the new uncertainty weighted linear regression (UWLR) models for the calibration and comparison of a XRF machine through 59 geochemical reference materials (GRMs) and a procedure blank sample. The mean concentration and uncertainty data for the GRMs used for the calibrations (Supplementary Materials) (available here) filewere achieved from an up-to-date compilation of chemical data and their processing from well-known discordancy and significance tests. The drift-corrected XRF intensity and its uncertainty were determined from mostly duplicate pressed powder pellets. The comparison of the OLR (linear correlation coefficient r∼0.9523–0.9964 and 0.9771–0.9999, respectively, for before and after matrix correction) and UWLR models (r∼0.9772–0.9976 and 0.9970–0.9999, respectively) clearly showed that the latter with generally higher values of r is preferable for routine calibrations of analytical procedures. Both calibrations were successfully applied to rock matrices, and the results were generally consistent with those obtained in other laboratories although the UWLR model showed mostly narrower confidence limits of the mean (slope and intercept) or lower uncertainties than the OLR. Similar sensitivity (∼2.69–46.17 kc·s−1·%−1 for the OLR and ∼2.78–59.69 kc·s−1·%−1 for the UWLR) also indicated that the UWLR could advantageously replace the OLR model. Another novel aspect is that the total uncertainty can be reported for individual chemical data. If the analytical instruments were routinely calibrated from the UWLR model, this action would make the science of geochemistry more quantitative than at present.

show abstract

“…Also i n c l u d e d i n T a b l e 1 are t h e NBS c e r t i f i e d v a l u e s a s w e l l as CCRMP c e r t i f i e d v a l u e s and " p r e f e r r e d " v a l u e s g i v e n by(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22). The mean v a l u e , w i t h one s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n among 3-9 d e t e r m i n a t i o n s a t e a c h l a b o r a t o r y , is r e p o r t e d .The f i n a l column i n d i c a t e s t h e r a t i o o f t h e LANLt o TAMU a v e r a g e uranium c o n c e n t r a t i o n s f o r each r e f e r e n c e material.…”

unclassified

Comparative Determination of Uranium In Silicates by Delayed Neutron Activation Analysis

Conrad

Rowe

Gladney

1982

Geostandards Newsletter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results of the measurement of uranium in silicate reference materials on the same samples at two different facilities, both using delayed neutron activation analysis, are compared. Good agreement was observed between the results of our two laboratories. Discrepancies have been observed occasionally between different laboratories which utilize delayed neutron activation analysis. On the basis of the results observed in this work, we conclude that discrepant results are not due to variations in the physical facilities of the laboratories.

show abstract

Reference materials ; rock samples SY-2, SY-3, MRG-1

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

An Optimised 1,10‐Phenanthroline Method for the Determination of Ferrous and Ferric Oxides in Silicate Rocks, Soils and Minerals

An Optimised 1,10‐Phenanthroline Method for the Determination of Ferrous and Ferric Oxides in Silicate Rocks, Soils and Minerals

Statistically Coherent Calibration of X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry for Major Elements in Rocks and Minerals

Comparative Determination of Uranium In Silicates by Delayed Neutron Activation Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About