Under the auspices of the Organic Analysis Working Group (OAWG) of the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM) a key comparison, CCQM K55.b, was coordinated by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) in 2010/2011. Nineteen national measurement institutes and the BIPM participated. Participants were required to assign the mass fraction of aldrin present as the main component in the comparison sample for CCQM-K55.b which consisted of technical grade aldrin obtained from the National Measurement Institute Australia that had been subject to serial recrystallization and drying prior to sub-division into the units supplied for the comparison.Aldrin was selected to be representative of the performance of a laboratory's measurement capability for the purity assignment of organic compounds of medium structural complexity [molar mass range 300 Da to 500 Da] and low polarity (pKOW < −2) for which related structure impurities can be quantified by capillary gas phase chromatography (GC).The key comparison reference value (KCRV) for the aldrin content of the material was 950.8 mg/g with a combined standard uncertainty of 0.85 mg/g. The KCRV was assigned by combination of KCRVs assigned by consensus from participant results for each orthogonal impurity class. The relative expanded uncertainties reported by laboratories having results consistent with the KCRV ranged from 0.3% to 0.6% using a mass balance approach and 0.5% to 1% using a qNMR method.The major analytical challenge posed by the material proved to be the detection and quantification of a significant amount of oligomeric organic material within the sample and most participants relying on a mass balance approach displayed a positive bias relative to the KCRV (overestimation of aldrin content) in excess of 10 mg/g due to not having adequate procedures in place to detect and quantify the non-volatile content—specifically the non-volatile organics content—of the comparison sample.There was in general excellent agreement between participants in the identification and the quantification of the total and individual related structure impurities, water content and the residual solvent content of the sample.The comparison demonstrated the utility of 1H NMR as an independent method for quantitative analysis of high purity compounds. In discussion of the participant results it was noted that while several had access to qNMR estimates for the aldrin content that were inconsistent with their mass balance determination they decided to accept the mass balance result and assumed a hidden bias in their NMR data. By contrast, laboratories that placed greater confidence in their qNMR result were able to resolve the discrepancy through additional studies that provided evidence of the presence of non-volatile organic impurity at the requisite level to bring their mass balance and qNMR estimates into agreement.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 ...
Under the auspices of the Organic Analysis Working Group (OAWG) of the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM) a key comparison, CCQM K55.c, was coordinated by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) in 2012. Twenty National Measurement Institutes or Designated Institutes and the BIPM participated. Participants were required to assign the mass fraction of valine present as the main component in the comparison sample for CCQM-K55.c. The comparison samples were prepared from analytical grade L-valine purchased from a commercial supplier and used as provided without further treatment or purification.Valine was selected to be representative of the performance of a laboratory's measurement capability for the purity assignment of organic compounds of low structural complexity [molecular weight range 100–300] and high polarity (pKOW > −2).The KCRV for the valine content of the material was 992.0 mg/g with a combined standard uncertainty of 0.3 mg/g. The key comparison reference value (KCRV) was assigned by combination of KCRVs assigned from participant results for each orthogonal impurity class. The relative expanded uncertainties reported by laboratories having results consistent with the KCRV ranged from 1 mg/g to 6 mg/g when using mass balance based approaches alone, 2 mg/g to 7 mg/g using quantitative 1H NMR (qNMR) based approaches and from 1 mg/g to 2.5 mg/g when a result obtained by a mass balance method was combined with a separate qNMR result.The material provided several analytical challenges. In addition to the need to identify and quantify various related amino acid impurities including leucine, isoleucine, alanine and α-amino butyrate, care was required to select appropriate conditions for performing Karl Fischer titration assay for water content to avoid bias due to in situ formation of water by self-condensation under the assay conditions. It also proved to be a challenging compound for purity assignment by qNMR techniques.There was overall excellent agreement between participants in the identification and the quantification of the total and individual related structure impurities, water content, residual solvent and total non-volatile content of the sample. Appropriate technical justifications were developed to rationalise observed discrepancies in the limited cases where methodology differences led to inconsistent results.The comparison demonstrated that to perform a qNMR purity assignment the selection of appropriate parameters and an understanding of their potential influence on the assigned value is critical for reliable implementation of the method, particularly when one or more of the peaks to be quantified consist of complex multiplet signals.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 (CIP...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.