论文部分内容阅读
目的比较高分辨率连续光源原予吸收法(HR-CS-AAS)和离子色谱法(IC)测定水中氟化物。方法用离子色谱和高分辨率连续光源原子吸收分别测定水样及进行加标回收实验,比较两者的检测限、精密度、准确度等指标。并采用配对t检验检查2种方法测定水中氟的结果是否有显著差异。结果离子色谱法检测限为20μg/L,RSD为2.0%~4.3%,加标回收率为96.0%~103%。原子吸收法检测限为42μg/L,RSD为1.7%~3.6%,加标回收率为96.5%~106%。离子色谱和原子吸收法同时测定24份实际水样,测定结果进行配对t检验,结果表明2法测定水中氟差异无统计学意义。结论高分辨率连续光源原子吸收法可用于测定水中氟,相对于离子色谱法,原子吸收法具备样品处理简单、节省时间、适合大批量样品测定的特点。
Objective To compare fluoride in water with HR-CS-AAS and ion chromatography (IC). Methods The water samples were determined by ion chromatography and high resolution continuous light source atomic absorption spectrometry. The detection limits, precision and accuracy of the two methods were compared. And paired t test to check the two methods to determine whether there is a significant difference in fluoride results in water. Results The limit of detection of ion chromatography was 20μg / L, RSD was 2.0% -4.3%, and the recoveries were 96.0% -103%. The detection limit was 42 μg / L and the RSD was 1.7% ~ 3.6%. The recoveries were 96.5% -106%. Ion chromatography and atomic absorption spectrometry simultaneous determination of 24 actual water samples, the test results were paired t test, the results show that 2 method of determination of fluoride in water was not statistically significant. Conclusion High-resolution continuous light source atomic absorption spectrometry can be used to determine fluorine in water. Compared with ion chromatography, atomic absorption spectrometry has the advantages of simple sample processing, time saving and suitable for the determination of large quantities of samples.