Problem with atomic spectometry

  • Thread starter Thread starter nickatomic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atomic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around issues encountered while measuring chromium (Cr) using atomic spectrometry with a flame, specifically with the Aanalyst 200 instrument. Participants explore potential reasons for inconsistent absorbance readings of standards, calibration challenges, and the stability of chromium in solution.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant reports lower absorbances for chromium standards after calibration, questioning the stability of chromium over time.
  • Another participant asks for the concentrations of the standards being measured.
  • A participant mentions using standards ranging from 0.2 mg/lt to 4 mg/lt and notes a good calibration initially, but subsequent measurements yield smaller absorbances.
  • Concerns are raised about potential inconsistencies in the atomizer and the need for detailed sample preparation information, including the use of matrix modifiers.
  • Questions arise regarding whether the samples remained within the linear range for calibration and whether instrument drift could be a factor.
  • Participants discuss the importance of background spectrum analysis and the cleaning of glassware used for standards.
  • One participant notes that they do not observe similar differences when measuring for copper (Cu), nickel (Ni), and lead (Pb), suggesting a specific issue with chromium.
  • Another participant proposes that variability might stem from the soot in the yellow flame, which could affect measurements if the flame's characteristics change.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various hypotheses regarding the cause of the measurement discrepancies, with no consensus reached on the underlying issue. Multiple competing views on the factors affecting the measurements remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential dependencies on the definitions of stability, the effects of flame characteristics, and the specifics of sample preparation that have not been fully clarified.

nickatomic
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
i have a big problem while i m trying to measure Cr with flame with Aanalyst 200

i m following the guidelines of perkin elmer. i m using a rich yello flame 4.5/10.
i have made some standards 0.2, 1,2,4 with 0.2% nitric acid.
i m doing calibration and when i finish i have noticed that the same standards showing lower absorbances
why that is happening? is Cr unstable by time?
thank you
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
What concentrations are you measuring in your standards?
 
Last edited:
i was using 0.2 mg/lt to 4 mg/lt. i made a very good calibration but after i finished and measured again standards it was showing smaller absorbances and of course concentrations
 
Could it be an inconsistency in the atomizer? What exactly is your sample, and how did you prepare it? Are you using a matrix modifier? The more detail you provide, the more like someone will be able to debug the problem.
 
Last edited:
nickatomic said:
i was using 0.2 mg/lt to 4 mg/lt. i made a very good calibration but after i finished and measured again standards it was showing smaller absorbances and of course concentrations

Were the samples still in the linear range? That is, could you obtain a 'new' calibration curve and judge it 'very good' as you did with the earlier analysis? If so, it could be instrument drift. This can occur for a variety of reasons. Did you take a background spectrum (blank) just prior to analyzing in both cases?
I think it is unlikely that the chromium is not stable or is precipitating out of solution but it is a very easy thing for you to check. Are you storing your standard solutions in plastic or glass? Was the glass cleaned with 6M nitric acid and baked out as a last step in its cleaning?
 
thank you for your replies
about matrix modifier. . i don't think that it needs because i m using flame - absorbion. i think that it is used only to furnace.
about the standard. i have made it from a comercial one. i don't think it has to do with dilutions or cleaning. the comercial one is in plastic bottle and i m having mine in glass that it is well cleaned with nitric acid
i m near the characteristic for yello rich flame when i begin the measurings. something is happening with the standard i think tha i can't explain. .
 
i want to add that for cu and Ni and pb i don't see that difference
 
When you analyze for Pb, Ni and Cu are you using the yellow rich flame? Could the soot in the yellow flame be the source of the variability? One time the flame is a little less yellow than the next perhaps?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
17
Views
3K