首页> 外文OA文献 >ECOC comparison exercise with identical thermal protocols after temperature offset correction ndash; instrument diagnostics by in-depth evaluation of operational parameters
【2h】

ECOC comparison exercise with identical thermal protocols after temperature offset correction ndash; instrument diagnostics by in-depth evaluation of operational parameters

机译:在温度偏移校正后使用相同的热规约进行ECOC比较练习–通过深入评估运行参数来进行仪器诊断

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

A comparison exercise on thermal-optical elemental carbon/organic carbon(ECOC) analysers was carried out among 17 European laboratories. Contrary toprevious comparison exercises, the 17 participants made use of an identicalinstrument set-up, after correcting for temperature offsets with theapplication of a recently developed temperature calibration kit (SunsetLaboratory Inc, OR, US). Temperature offsets reported by participants rangedfrom −93 to +100 °C per temperature step.Five filter samples and two sucrose solutions were analysed with both theEUSAAR2 and NIOSH870 thermal protocols. scores were calculated for total carbon (TC); nine outliers and threestragglers were identified. Three outliers and eight stragglers were foundfor EC. Overall, the participants provided results between the warninglevels with the exception of two laboratories that showed poor performance,the causes of which were identified and corrected through the course of thecomparison exercise. The TC repeatability and reproducibility (expressed asrelative standard deviations) were 11 and 15% for EUSAAR2 and 9.2and 12% for NIOSH870; the standard deviations for EC were 15 and20% for EUSAAR2 and 20 and 26% for NIOSH870.TC was in good agreement between the two protocols, TC = 0.98 × TC ( = 1.00, robust means). Transmittance(TOT) calculated EC for NIOSH870 was found to be 20% lower than forEUSAAR2, EC = 0.80 × EC ( = 0.96,robust means). The thermograms and laser signal values were compared andsimilar peak patterns were observed per sample and protocol for mostparticipants. Notable deviations from the typical patterns indicated eitherthe absence or inaccurate application of the temperature calibrationprocedure and/or pre-oxidation during the inert phase of the analysis. Lowor zero pyrolytic organic carbon (POC), as reported by a few participants,is suggested as an indicator of an instrument-specific pre-oxidation. Asample-specific pre-oxidation effect was observed for filter G, for allparticipants and both thermal protocols, indicating the presence of oxygendonors on the suspended particulate matter. POC (TOT) levels were lower forNIOSH870 than for EUSAAR2, which is related to the heating profiledifferences of the two thermal protocols.
机译:在欧洲的17个实验室中进行了热光学元素碳/有机碳(ECOC)分析仪的比较。与之前的比较练习相反,在使用最新开发的温度校准套件(SunsetLaboratory Inc,美国俄勒冈州)校正温度偏移之后,这17名参与者使用了相同的仪器设置。参与者报告的温度偏差为-93至+100°C /温度步长。同时使用EUSAAR2和NIOSH870热规程分析了五个过滤器样品和两种蔗糖溶液。计算总碳分数(TC);确定了九个离群值和三个散布者。为EC发现了三个异常值和八个散布者。总体而言,除了两个实验室表现不佳外,参与者在警告级别之间提供了结果,但两个实验室的表现均较差,并在比较过程中予以确定和纠正。 EUSAAR2的TC重复性和再现性(相对标准偏差表示)分别为11%和15%,NIOSH870的TC和9.2%和12%。 EC的标准偏差对于EUSAAR2为15%和20%,对于NIOSH870为20%和26%。TC在两种方案之间具有很好的一致性,TC = 0.98×TC(= 1.00,稳健平均值)。发现NIOSH870的透射率(TOT)计算出的EC比EUSAAR2低20%,EC = 0.80×EC(= 0.96,稳健平均值)。比较了热分析图和激光信号值,并且对于大多数参与者,每个样品和实验方案观察到相似的峰型。与典型模式的显着偏差表明在分析的惰性阶段中温度校准程序和/或预氧化的应用不存在或不正确。据一些参与者报道,低或零热解有机碳(POC)被认为是特定于仪器的预氧化的指标。对于过滤器G,所有参与者和两个热方案,都观察到了样品特有的预氧化作用,表明悬浮颗粒物上存在氧供体。 NIOSH870的POC(TOT)水平低于EUSAAR2,这与两种热方案的加热曲线差异有关。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号