Comparison of inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry for determination of silicon in molybdenum-aluminum alloy with two interference correction methods
YAN Yan
Baoji Education Institute of Shaanxi,Baoji 721000,China
Abstract：During the determination of silicon in molybdenum-aluminum alloy by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES), Si 288.158 nm was selected as the analytical line. At this time, the characteristic spectral line of matrix molybdenum (Mo 288.137 nm) would cause spectral interference with Si 288.158 nm. Both matrix blank subtraction and multi-spectral fitting (MSF) could correct the interference caused by matrix molybdenum. The effect of two interference correction modes were analyzed by comparing the method property indexes, including the linear equation of calibration curve, linear correlation coefficient, sensitivity, limit of quantification, precision, and accuracy. The results showed that the slope and sensitivity of calibration curve were basically the same when the two interference correction modes of matrix blank subtraction and MSF were used. The linear correlation coefficient of calibration curve with MSF correction was obviously better than that of matrix blank subtraction correction. The limit of quantification of two methods was 0.12 μg/mL and 0.079 μg/mL, respectively, implying that the limit of quantification with MSF correction mode was better. The contents of silicon in five molybdenum-aluminum alloy samples with silicon mass fraction of 0.023%, 0.063%, 0.136%, 0.264% and 0.454% were determined. For the correction mode of matrix blank subtraction, the relative standard deviations (RSDs) were between 0.62% and 1.9%, and the recoveries were between 90% and 104%. For the correction mode of MSF method, the RSDs were between 0.55% and 1.3%, and the recoveries were between 95% and 103%. Therefore, the determination method with MSF correction exhibited better precision and accuracy compared to the matrix blank subtraction mode.
颜燕. 两种干扰校正方式下电感耦合等离子体原子发射光谱法测定钼铝合金中硅的方法比较[J]. 冶金分析, 2022, 42(3): 52-58.
YAN Yan. Comparison of inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry for determination of silicon in molybdenum-aluminum alloy with two interference correction methods. , 2022, 42(3): 52-58.
[1] 严子心,曲景奎,余志辉,等.多谱线拟合-电感耦合等离子体原子发射光谱法测定高纯镍中痕量钴[J].分析化学,2019,47(3): 423-428. YAN Zixin,QU Jingkui,YU Zhihui,et al.Multi-spectral fitting-determination of trace cobalt in high purity nickel by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry[J].Chinese Journal of Analytical Chemistry,2019,47(3):423-428. [2] 江晖,廖天宇,李广鹏,等.利用LC-AFS与ICP-OES测定污泥中砷形态及总砷含量[J].分析测试学报,2018,37(9):1034-1039. JIANG Hui,LIAO Tianyu,LI Guangpeng,et al.Determination of arsenic speciations and total arsenic content in sludge by LC-AFS and ICP-OES[J].Journal of Instrumental Analysis,2018,37(9): 1034-1039. [3] 邓传东,王国华,孙琳,等.电感耦合等离子体原子发射光谱法测定铀锆合金中钙锂镁钠[J].冶金分析,2020,40(5): 47-51. DENG Chuandong,WANG Guohua,SUN Lin,et al.Determination of calcium, lithium, magnesium and sodium in uranium-zirconium alloy by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry[J].Metallurgical Analysis,2020,40(5): 47-51. [4] 潘春秀,王伟,李德军,等.电感耦合等离子体原子发射光谱法同时测定球墨铸铁用稀土镁球化剂中硅、镁、钙、锰、铝、钛及稀土总量[J].理化检验(化学分册),2019,55(2): 227-230. PAN Chunxiu,WANG Wei,LI Dejun,et al.Simultaneous determination of silicon, magnesium, calcium, manganese, aluminum, titanium and rare earth in rare earth magnesium spheroidizer for ductile iron by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry[J]. Physical Testing and Chemical Analysis(Part B: Chemical Analysis),2019,55(2):227-230. [5] 李帆,杨春晟,丁妍,等.称量定容-ICP-AES法测定纯铁中痕量铝、铬、铜、锰、镍和硅[J].分析试验室,2019,38(5):542-547. LI Fan,YANG Chunsheng,DING Yan,et al.Determination of trace Al,Cr,Cu,Mn,Ni,Si in pure iron by ICP-AES with mass dilution method[J].Chinese Journal of Analysis Laboratory,2019,38(5):542-547. [6] 万家亮. ICP中27种元素间的光谱干扰[J].华中师范大学学报(自然科学版),1988,2(4):455-457. WANG Jialiang.Spectral interference in 27 elements by ICP-AES[J].Journal of Central China Normal University (Natural Sciences),1988,2(4):455-457. [7] 韩涛,余晓平,李明礼,等.高盐样品中锂的电感耦合等离子体发射光谱法(ICP-OES)测定研究[J].光谱学与光谱分析,2020, 40(4):1214-1220. HAN Tao,YU Xiaoping,LI Mingli,et al.Determination of lithium in high salinity samples by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES)[J].Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis,2020,40(4):1214-1220. [8] 王少娜,靳星,刘彪,等. ICP-OES法测定钒的光谱干扰研究[J].光谱学与光谱分析,2020,40(7):2283-2288. WANG Shaona,JIN Xing,LIU Biao,et al.Study on spectral interference in the determination of vanadium by ICP-OES[J].Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis,2020,40(7):2283-2288. [9] 杨平,邓传东,曾诚,等.电感耦合等离子体发射光谱法测定铀锆铌混合材料中12种杂质元素含量[J].分析科学学报,2020,36(4):553-558. YANG Ping,DENG Chuandong,ZENG Cheng,et al.Determination of 12 impurity elements in mixed materials of uranium, niobium and zirconium by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry[J].Journal of Analytical Science,2020,36(4):553-558. [10] 罗艳,丛海霞,赵中奇,等. ICP-AES中多重谱线拟合(MSF)扣除光谱干扰法在Th、U测定中的应用[J].核化学与放射化学,2015,37(1): 37-40. LUO Yan,CONG Haixia,ZHAO Zhongqi,et al.ICP-AES with MSF for determination of Th and U[J].Journal of Nuclear and Radiochemisty,2015,37(1):37-40. [11] 龚琦.对电感耦合等离子体发射光谱法中一些问题的认识[J].冶金分析,2018,38(9):26-30. GONG Qi.Understanding of some issues about inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry [J].Metallurgical Analysis, 2018,38(9):26-30.
