| Autor: |
Galas, C., Sansone, Umberto, Belli, Maria, Barbizzi, Sabrina, Cyffroy, Philippe, Fanzutti, Giovanni Paolo, Kanivets, Volodya, Ocone, Rita, Piani, Raffaella, Repetti, Milena, Riccardi, Michele, Terzoni, Cinzia, Voitsekhovitch, Oleg V. |
| Zdroj: |
Accreditation & Quality Assurance; May2002, Vol. 7 Issue 5, p202-208, 7p |
| Abstrakt: |
Sampling and sample preparation/processing are known to carry large, but typically unknown uncertainty contribution to the final analytical data and there is a lack of qualitative and quantitative data on the comparability of results achieved by the different sampling methods. To this end, an intercomparison programme was founded by the European Commission, in which different institutions participated using their own ”in-situ” methods (”ANPA”, ”EDF” and ”MIDIYA”) for collection of water and suspended material in freshwater bodies. The main criterion for this intercomparison was the agreement among the 137Cs activity concentrations in the dissolved phase (Bq l–1), those associated with the suspended particles (Bq g–1) and the concentrations of total suspended material (TSM) in the water body (mg l–1). The results show that the sampling systems provide TSM concentration results with low accuracy; on the contrary, they are recommended for the determination of 137Cs activity concentration in the dissolved phase. Concerning the determination of radiocaesium activity concentration in the suspended particles, the ”EDF” system provides the more reliable results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink