190 likes | 203 Views
This publication discusses the interlaboratory CEC and exchangeable cation studies on bentonite buffer materials, focusing on methods, precision, and accuracy. The results indicate discrepancies and suggest ways to evaluate the real differences.
E N D
Publication of the ABM ringtest studies onCEC and exchangeable cationsDohrmann, R. BGR/LBEG
2 papers were accepted by Clays and Clay Minerals:Interlaboratory CEC and exchangeable cation study of bentonite buffer materials: I. Cu(II)-triethylenetetramine methodInterlaboratory CEC and exchangeable cation study of bentonite buffer materials: II. Alternative methodsDohrmann, R., Genske, D.,Karnland, O., Kaufhold, S., Kiviranta, L.,Olsson, S.,Plötze, M.,Sandén, T.,Sellin, P., Svensson, D.,Valter, M.BGR/LBEG, S&B Industrial Minerals, Clay Technology, B+Tech,ETH Zürich,SKB
Large differences of results reported during 2010 meeting Lab exchange of data to clarify: How large is scattering (precision)? Which results are more plausible (accuracy)? Motivation and questions
Mg2+ a few meq/100 g larger at contact What is a real difference? TR-09-29 (LOT) Svensson, 2010 (ABM meeting) Mg2+ analysis of the same ABM samples differed between different labs Mg2+ meq/100 g lab A lab BCalcigel 8.7 14.6MX80 3.6 8.6Rockle 9.7 17.2DepCAN 15.2 24.9Ikosorb 16.6 26.6…
Ca2+ data inaccurate, butpartly with good precision Ca2+ data inaccurate, butpartly with good precision Exchange population, precision (1s)
Precision (standard deviation) CEC (ICP/AAS) CEC (VIS) Na K Mg Ca
The overall quality of the returned CEC results using Cu-trien method was good Some outliers were detected Exchange population (cations) exceeds CEC largely The most important question what is a real difference? can be evaluated based on ‚precision data‘ now Conclusions Cu-trien
Accuracy? *: inflated by chloride-rich pore water; **: inflated by sulphate-rich pore water (gypsum dissolution); ***: questionable if inflated by dolomite dissolution.
Precision of alternative methods is good Accuracy is partly not attainable, here more information than just CEC analyses are needed K+ and CEC results are (mostly) accurate Na+, Mg2+, and Ca2+ results partly inflated by chloride- or sulphate-rich pore water and soluble phases Conclusions alternative methods
If lab A and lab B use the same method: result A @result B: good precision (± small deviation) result A ¹result B (difference > precision): individual error(s) note: check with standard clay If lab A and lab B use different methods: result A @result B: indication forgood precision result A ¹result B (difference > precision): option 1) individual error(s) option 2) systematic difference = operationally correct (both?) option 3) „complicated minerals“ such as zeolites (specific adsorption) or vermiculites (slow / incomplete cation exchange) What is a real difference?
Compensation of two sources of error, occasionally good agreement What is an accurate/precise CEC result? ü ü