Using instrumental techniques to increase the accuracy of the gravimetric determination of sulfate

Vetter, Thomas W.; Pratt, Kenneth W.; Turk, Gregory C.; Beck, Charles M.; Butler, Therese A.

doi:10.1039/an9952002025

Cited by 24 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even national metrology laboratories have published rather few such traceability chains for their certifications (e.g., Vetter et al. 1995, Moody and Vetter 1996), and none that the author is aware of for multi‐element certifications.…”

Section: General Discussion Of Iag Tasks As a Certifying Bodymentioning

confidence: 99%

Experience of the International Association of Geoanalysts as a Certifying Body

Kane¹

2010

Geostandard Geoanalytic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reference materials (RMs) to support geoanalysis have a long history, dating back to the issuance of G‐1 and W‐1 in 1951. This paper addresses only one aspect of the most recent part of that history, the experience of the International Association of Geoanalysts (IAG) as a certifying body. In 2002, the Certification Committee of the IAG met in Potsdam to discuss becoming a certifying body able to produce RMs for the geoanalytical community. Following that meeting, the IAG developed and published a protocol to assure that IAG RMs would meet International Organization for Standardization (ISO) guidelines to the fullest extent possible. Many practical problems arise in the application of the recommendations of the ISO Guides to any one specific certification project. The recommendations describe the ideal; achievable reality is always somewhat less than that ideal, presenting a significant challenge to the IAG as a certifying body. This paper will summarise experience to date, while focusing on the most challenging issues, deriving uncertainties compliant with the Guide to Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) and establishing traceability of certified values (CVs).

show abstract

Section: General Discussion Of Iag Tasks As a Certifying Bodymentioning

confidence: 99%

Experience of the International Association of Geoanalysts as a Certifying Body

Kane¹

2010

Geostandard Geoanalytic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Volatilisation of substance in the final step of generating the compound to be weighed is another imperfection. These deviations from the ideal behaviour are usually small and can be corrected for by use of one of the well-known sensitive instrumental methods [4].…”

Section: Gravimetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gravimetry can therefore be regarded as a primary method of measurement in chemical analysis. Because of its high reliability and accuracy, gravimetry is used for certifying SI-traceable reference materials [4] for inorganic chemistry.…”

Section: Gravimetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary methods of measurement in chemical analysis

Richter

1997

Accreditation and Quality Assurance

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Primary methods of measurement have a central function in metrology. They are an essential component in the realisation of the SI units and therefore are indispensable for establishing traceability of measurements of all kinds of physical quantities to the corresponding SI units. This is also true for chemical analysis. Gravimetry, titrimetry, coulometry, and isotope dilution mass spectrometry (IDMS) are evaluated with regard to their potential to be primary methods according to a general definition of primary methods recently given by the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM). Optical absorption spectrometry and methods based on colligative properties are also considered. A general scheme for establishing traceability of chemical measurements to the SI units using primary methods is discussed.

show abstract

“…Analytical uncertainty (ISO 1993, Williams 1995, Vetter et al 1995, Moody and Vetter 1996, Papadakis et al 1997, Ellison et al 2000 must be also correctly established throughout the traceability chain. In particular, the uncertainty in an analytical result is not adequately expressed by calculating the repeatability, for example.…”

Section: Traceability Of Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is the approach that NIST has taken historically in renewing its various SRMs, for example, the series SRM 1633, 1633a, 1633b (trace elements in coal fly ash) and by 1643 to 1643e (trace elements in water). Both Moody and Vetter (1996) and Vetter et al (1995) have described the development of complete uncertainty statements that reflect this use of an existing RM in assessing the trueness of a new certified value.…”

Section: Newslettermentioning

confidence: 99%

Fitness‐for‐Purpose of Reference Material Reference Values in Relation to Traceability of Measurement, as Illustrated by USGS BCR‐1, NIST SRM 610 and IAEA NBS28

Kane

2002

Geostandards Newsletter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As in all fields of sample analysis, reference materials play a large role in supporting measurements in the geosciences. While a rather large number of materials are in distribution (> 380), not all are equally effective or fit‐for‐purpose in supporting laboratory data quality and thereby assuring the desired comparability of measurements between laboratories. Equally important, reference values that are not fit‐for‐purpose cannot be used effectively to establish traceability links between laboratory measurements and national and international standards. The needed fitness‐for‐purpose is not achieved for reference values either when more than one reference value has been proposed and a consensus does not exist among users as to which should be used by all, or when reference value uncertainties are too large in comparison to those of routine laboratory measurements. The focus of this review will be, first to outline the current reality, and second to suggest ways in which certifications of RMs can be improved to provide reference values that are universally accepted and more fit‐for‐purpose in general laboratory use. The discussion will be illustrated largely by current uses of USGS BCR‐1, NIST SRM 610 and IAEA NBS28, as these three materials are those for which the largest body of newly published data exists, according to recent bibliographies of the geoanalytical literature published annually in Geostandards Newsletter: The Journal of Geostandards and Geoanalysis.

show abstract

Using instrumental techniques to increase the accuracy of the gravimetric determination of sulfate

Cited by 24 publications

References 7 publications

Experience of the International Association of Geoanalysts as a Certifying Body

Experience of the International Association of Geoanalysts as a Certifying Body

Primary methods of measurement in chemical analysis

Fitness‐for‐Purpose of Reference Material Reference Values in Relation to Traceability of Measurement, as Illustrated by USGS BCR‐1, NIST SRM 610 and IAEA NBS28

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About