JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES Archives


CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES Archives

CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES Archives


CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES Home

CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES Home

CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES  July 2018

CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES July 2018

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

How are on site analysers calibrated

From:

Colin Green <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Colin Green <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 9 Jul 2018 17:16:13 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (33 lines)

Hi group
This follows on more from previous posts and hopefully gives some practical answers to the calibration question.

Calibration is a tricky area. A lot depends on the method, the instrumentation used, the conditions, the analytes being detected etc

XRF is a relatively easy system to calibrate. As discussed earlier, it uses fluorescence, so as long as you know how much energy goes into the sample matrix, you always get the same amount out depending on the atom the X Ray hits. If you have a good excess of X Ray energy, the calibrations performed in the factory remain constant. Using a sample containing a known concentration of metals as a field reference is a good idea in theory. The problem here is that it is difficult to get certified reference samples that remain stable . The problem is that even though metals are usually non volatile and insoluble, they do slowly get lost from the reference, especially if they are supplied as a powder (the most common form) I would like to see metals of interest at appropriate concentrations embedded in polyethylene. This would be a much more stable reference.

As the reference sample degrades, so the user may conclude the analyser is not working that well. If XRF were to become more widely used, the reference sample producers would look into making more practical and stable reference samples. Personally, I am now happy to rely on a simple calibrator that confirms the XRF can get the correct concentration value for a single metal such as the nickel content in a certified stainless steel. If the nickel value is correct, it is 95% certain the others are too.

As has been noted. XRF really is very accurate and repeatable and you can get a lot of analysis done in a fairly short time period.

For organics, life becomes much more complex. For anything that is affected by temperature or timing, the calibration must be carried out at the same time. This includes all colourimetric, turbidometric and immunoassay bases systems. Portable GC methods are also affected by temperature and timing and require quite complex calibration procedures. The next challenge is selecting a calibrator that is appropriate for what is being looked for. For TPH, the differences in aliphatic/aromatic ratios, the ratio of C10 to C20 hydrocarbons etc as the hydrocarbon degrades makes a universal calibrator difficult to select. In many cases the dynamic range of the method is such that a calibration curve is just that, a curve. This means a minimum of 3 calibration solutions must be used, preferably 5. Diluting standards to create calibration curves is hard enough in the lab and experience shows almost impossible in the field. Other organics such as chlorinated solvents can be easier because you are looking for a single compound, but on some sites there are mixtures of different solvents and degradation also occurs with the various breakdown products have different response factors. All of these methods have some form of chemical reaction (or physical chemistry interactions) going on. This means the operator must be consistent in their timings to ensure the calibrator is relevant to the sample analysis. 

Infra red systems, especially Fourier Transform methods also have stable calibrations, but unfortunately are not that good at identifying the type of hydrocarbon present. This makes selecting the correct calibrator difficult, which is why infra red, even from labs, fell out of use.

This is why fluorescence for TPH/PAH is a better choice. It is significantly less affected by temperature and time and can identify the hydrocarbon type, so can select the most appropriate calibrator. Just like XRF. As no chemical reactions are occurring, it does not matter how consistent the operator is when performing the analysis. The master calibrations carried out by the manufacturer remain stable just like the calibrations in XRF. Selecting a single surrogate calibrator to measure the energy output is therefore much easier. The biggest problem is ensuring the reference calibrator is the correct concentration and has not been contaminated. Fluorescence can once again help here because it is possible to cross reference several parameters when running the reference calibrator to ensure it matches the initial manufacturer derived parameters. Analysers such as the QED use extensive artificial intelligence algorithms to continuously check the analyser, field calibrator and sample performance to ensure everything is working correctly. The best analysers have a facility to compare the calibration carried out at the start of a sample batch to the same calibration at the end of the batch. Provided the calibrator solution matches the required proof that it is the correct concentration, is the correct material and is contamination free, a variance of less than +/-15% between the first and final calibration check should provide a good level of confidence that the analyser has remained stable (the effect on the results of a 15% variation is actually only around 5% for the reported concentration)

There are test kits for inorganic compounds such as cyanide, Chrome 6, chloride, ammonia etc. These are usually colourimetric, but rely on an end point where a final coloured product is produced. Once the analyte of interest has been consumed to make the coloured product, it does not matter about time or temperature. In these cases, calibration is carried out by comparing the colour intensity or absorbtion at a set wavelength to find the concentration. Once again it is a factory calibration curve that is set up and stored in the reader.

I all of these cases, the manufacturer strives to ensure any reference materials they use come from traceable and certified reference materials and have sufficient evidence to back up the procedures used to construct the calibrations. 

Having a good verification scheme in place would allow manufacturers to demonstrate the stability of their system and give users confidence that the data is of a suitably high quality. I hope it will happen

As to the question, how does NASA calibrate their instruments. Just as I have outlined above. For UV fluorescence they have a solid fluorescent block with a known concentration of compound in. They were looking at a form of calcite, which has a natural and very stable fluorescence

Regards

Colin

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CONTAMINATED-LAND-STRATEGIES&A=1

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
November 1999
July 1999


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager