Three newly synthesized polyanthraquinone derivatives: 7,13-bis(9,10-dioxo-1-anthryl)-1,4,10-trioxa-7,13-diazacyclopentadecane, (AQ)A 2 15C5, 7,16-bis(9,10-dioxo-1-anthryl)-1,4,10,13-tetraoxa-7,16-diazacyclooctadecane, (AQ)A 2 18C6, and tris[(9,10-diokso-1-antryl)-aminoethyl]amine, (AQNet) 3 N, were examined by cyclic and normal pulse voltammetry. All anthraquinone groups in these compounds were electroactive and formed the radicals and dianions similarly to simple anthraquinone. The differences between the voltammograms obtained in the absence and presence of supporting electrolyte are discussed, and the diffusion coefficients of the compounds and the rates of the chemical reactions following the first reduction step were evaluated. (AQNet) 3 N appears to be a good model compound for multi electron transfers in aprotic solvents. It offers two consecutive nearly reversible 3-electron redox systems: 0/À 3 and À 3/À 6. The interactions of the radicals and dianions of the above compounds with alkali metal cations were examined.

The aim of this comparison was to demonstrate the capability of national metrology institutes to measure elemental mass fractions at a level of w(E) ≈ 1 g/kg as found in almost all mono-elemental calibration solutions. These calibration solutions represent an important link in traceability systems in inorganic analysis. Virtually all traceable routine measurements are linked to the SI through these calibration solutions. Every participant was provided with three solutions of each of the three selected elements chromium, cobalt and lead. This comparison was a joint activity of the Inorganic Analysis Working Group (IAWG) and the Electrochemical Analysis Working Group (EAWG) of the CCQM and was piloted by the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB, Braunschweig, Germany) with the help of the Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung (BAM, Berlin, Germany), the Centro Nacional de Metrología (CENAM, Querétaro, Mexico) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST, Gaithersburg, USA).A small majority of participants applied inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP OES) in combination with a variety of calibration strategies (one-point-calibration, bracketing, calibration curve, each with and without an internal standard). But also IDMS techniques were carried out on quadrupole, high resolution and multicollector ICP-MS machines as well as a TIMS machine. Several participants applied titrimetry. FAAS as well as ICP-MS combined with non-IDMS calibration strategies were used by at least one participant. The key comparison reference values (KCRV) were agreed upon during the IAWG/EAWG meeting in November 2011 held in Sydney as the added element content calculated from the gravimetric sample preparation. Accordingly the degrees of equivalence were calculated. Despite the large variety of methods applied no superior method could be identified. The relative deviation of the median of the participants' results from the gravimetric reference value was equal or smaller than 0.1% (with an average of 0.05%) in the case of all three elements.Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

No abstract

No abstract