Hi Peter
I have been using an XRF analyser on small contaminated sites for a year now. I have been testing areas on 1m to 1.5 grids giving between 100 and 200 readings per day. I have almost been achieving the 95% confidence discussed in the old CLR4 sampling strategies guidance. Much better than testing 10 to 15 samples. Verification samples are always taken and have shown that the XRF (Olympus Vanta) is spot on with Arsenic, Copper, Lead, Nickel, Zinc. It over estimates Cadmium and some of the other metals like Thorium and Uranium.
It is very interesting to see how some of the innocuous metals fit in the picture like titanium and tin, industrial residues that we don’t often test for, but do allow us to understand how and why the nasties arrived in the ground in the first place.
The analyser is usually set up on a tripod so I can stand away when it is working. Readings can therefore be taken within millimetres of each other. Sometimes this shows consistency and sometimes wild variation, again this helps me to understand how these metals arrived in the ground.
I have written some basic articles on my linkedin page about my experiences with these new analysers. https://www.linkedin.com/in/julian-puzyna-68610b46
Regards
Julian Puzyna
########################################################################
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
|