Comparison of two different dissolution methods for inductively coupledplasma atomic emission spectrometric determination of iron and silicon in titanium alloy
LI Fan1，2，3, YE Xiao-ying1，2，3, FENG Yan-qiu1，2，3
1. AVIC Beijing Institute of Aeronautical Materials， Beijing 100095， China；2. AVIC Testing Innovation Cooperation， Beijing 100095， China; 3. Beijing Key Laboratory of Aeronautical Materials Testing and Evaluation， Beijing 100095， China
Abstract：This report investigated two dissolving titanium alloy methods which were sulfuric acid dissolution method and hydrofluoric acid dissolution method. Fe and Si in titanium alloy could be determined accurately when the titanium alloy samples were dissolved by hydrofluoric acid dissolution method, and sulfuric acid dissolution method was not applied to Si element. After researching the influence of different dissolving temperature, the conclusion was obtained that high hotplate temperature was the best method for dissolving titanium alloys. Under such circumstance, titanium alloy could be dissolved rapidly, and there was no negative effect on the analysis of Fe element. Therefore, this dissolving method was selected when sulfuric acid was used in dissolving titanium alloys. Furthermore, the spectral interferences deriving from the basic element and coexistence elements in more than ten brands of titanium alloy in the determination of Fe, Si were investigated, and then analytical lines were selected. Fe 259.94nm, Fe 238.204nm, Fe 239.562nm and Si 251.611nm were selected as analytical lines, but when content of Mo was above 1%, Mo element ought to be matched in calculating curve to analyze Si element. The detection limit of Fe of sulfuric acid dissolution method is 0.089 μg/mL, and the detection limit of Fe and Si of hydrofluoric acid dissolution method were 0.016 μg/mL and 0.097 μg/mL, respectively.
李 帆，叶晓英，冯艳秋. 电感耦合等离子体原子发射光谱法测定钛合金中铁、硅不同溶解方法比较研究[J]. 冶金分析, 2012, 32(10): 30-36.
LI Fan， YE Xiao-ying，，FENG Yan-qiu. Comparison of two different dissolution methods for inductively coupledplasma atomic emission spectrometric determination of iron and silicon in titanium alloy. , 2012, 32(10): 30-36.
［6］P W J M.Boumans， J J A M Vrakking. Inductively coupled plamas:line widths and shapes detection limits, and spectral interferences, An integrated picture. Plenary lecture［J］. J. Anal. Atom. Spectrosc, 1987，（2）：513.
［7］P W J M Boumans, et al. Mutual spectral interferences of rare earth elements in inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry. I Rational line selection and correction procedure. ［J］.Pectrochim Acta：1988，(43B)：173P
［8］P W J M Boumans, et al. Mutual spectral interferences of rare earth elements in inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry. II Approach to the compilation and use of pseudo physically resolved spectral data. ［J］.Pectrochim Acta,1988，(43B)：1365.
［9］P W J M Boumans, J J A M Vrakking.Determination limit including selectivity as a criterion for line selection in trace analysis using inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES)-atutorial treatment of a fundamental problem of AES［J］.Pectrochim Acta,1987，(42B)：819.
［10］P W J M Boumans, J J A M Vrakking. Line selection in somic emission spectrometry using physically resolved spectra［J］.Pectrochim Acta,1988，(43B)：69.
［11］Li Fan，Feng Yanqiu. ICP-AES法测定铝合金中钪元素的方法研究［J］.光谱学与光谱分析（Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis），2003，23(5)：968-971.
