Assay of sodium carbonate

Author:

Wu Bing,Sobina Alena,Recknagel Sebastian,Meinhardt René,Rivera-Sánchez Griselda,Ortiz-Aparicio José Luis,Rozikova Matilda,Borges Paulo Paschoal,Sobral Sidney Pereira,Zhou Tao,Zhang Jianying,Asakai Toshiaki,Glebov Andrey,Melnikov Aleksandr,Gavrilkin Vladimir,Petrenko Anton,Tkachenko Volodymyr,Mariassy Michal,Hanková Zuzana,Shimolin Alexandr

Abstract

Main text The CCQM-K173 Assay of Sodium Carbonate key comparison was jointly organized by the Inorganic Analysis (IAWG) and Electrochemical Analysis and Classical Chemical Methods (EAWG) working groups of CCQM to test the abilities of the national metrology institutes (NMIs) to measure the purity or amount content of solid bases. They are important challenges for reference material producers, providers of other measurement services, such as proficiency testing schemes. Evidence of successful participation in formal, relevant international comparisons are needed to support calibration and measurement capability claims (CMCs) made by NMIs and designated institutes (DIs). Nine NMIs participated in this key comparison CCQM-K173. National Institute of Metrology P. R. China (NIM) and Ural Research Institute for Metrology - Affiliated Branch of the D.I. Mendeleyev Institute for Metrology (VNIIM-UNIIM), Russian Federation, acted as the coordinating laboratories of the comparison. The measurement methods used by the participants for measuring the amount content of bases expressed as sodium carbonate were coulometry and titrimetry. In general, good overlap of results was observed, the suitability of coulometry and titrimetry for assay of high purity materials was demonstrated. The majority of results were split in two groups differing from each. This bias was however covered by the stated uncertainty estimates. Various effects have been evaluated that may cause it. However, the reason for the bias has not been identified clearly. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database https://www.bipm.org/kcdb/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

Publisher

IOP Publishing

Subject

General Engineering

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3