No abstract

The discrimination potential of Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) is compared with previously reported solution ICP-MS methods using external calibration (EC) with internal standardization and a newly reported solution isotope dilution (ID) method for the analysis of two different glass populations. A total of 91 different glass samples were used for the comparison study; refractive index and elemental composition were measured by the techniques mentioned above. One set consisted of 45 headlamps taken from a variety of automobiles that represents a range of 20 years of manufacturing dates. A second set consisted of 46 automotive glasses (side windows, rear windows, and windshields) representing casework glass from different vehicle manufacturers over several years. The element menu for the LA-ICP-MS and EC-ICP-MS methods include Mg, Al, Ca, Mn, Ce, Ti, Zr, Sb, Ga, Ba, Rb, Sm, Sr, Hf, La, and Pb. The ID method was limited to the analysis of two isotopes each of Mg, Sr, Zr, Sb, Ba, Sm, Hf, and Pb. Laser ablation analyses were performed with a Q switched Nd:YAG, 266 nm, 6 mJ output energy laser. The laser was used in depth profile mode while sampling using a 50 microm spot size for 50 sec at 10 Hz (500 shots). The typical bias for the analysis of NIST 612 by LA-ICP-MS was less than 5% in all cases and typically better than 5% for most isotopes. The precision for the vast majority of the element menu was determined generally less than 10% for all the methods when NIST 612 was measured (40 microg x g(-1)). Method detection limits (MDL) for the EC and LA-ICP-MS methods were similar and generally reported as less than 1 microg x g(-1) for the analysis of NIST 612. While the solution sample introduction methods using EC and ID presented excellent sensitivity and precision, these methods have the disadvantages of destroying the sample, and also involve complex sample preparation. The laser ablation method was simpler, faster, and produced comparable discrimination to the EC-ICP-MS and ID-ICP-MS. LA-ICP-MS can offer an excellent alternative to solution analysis of glass in forensic casework samples.

Forensic analysis of glass samples was performed in different laboratories within the NITE-CRIME (Natural Isotopes and Trace Elements in Criminalistics and Environmental Forensics) European Network, using a variety of Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) systems. The main objective of the interlaboratory tests was to cross-validate the different combinations of laser ablation systems with different ICP-MS instruments. A first study using widely available samples, such as the NIST SRM 610 and NIST SRM 612 reference glasses, led to deviations in the determined concentrations for trace elements amongst the laboratories up to 60%. Extensive discussion among the laboratories and the production of new glass reference standards (FGS 1 and FGS 2) established an improved analytical protocol, which was tested on a well-characterized float glass sample (FG 10-1 from the BKA Wiesbaden collection). Subsequently, interlaboratory tests produced improved results for nearly all elements with a deviation o

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Elemental analysis of glass was conducted by 16 forensic science laboratories, providing a direct comparison between three analytical methods [micro-x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (μ-XRF), solution analysis using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), and laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry]. Interlaboratory studies using glass standard reference materials and other glass samples were designed to (a) evaluate the analytical performance between different laboratories using the same method, (b) evaluate the analytical performance of the different methods, (c) evaluate the capabilities of the methods to correctly associate glass that originated from the same source and to correctly discriminate glass samples that do not share the same source, and (d) standardize the methods of analysis and interpretation of results. Reference materials NIST 612, NIST 1831, FGS 1, and FGS 2 were employed to cross-validate these sensitive techniques and to optimize and standardize the analytical protocols. The resulting figures of merit for the ICP-MS methods include repeatability better than 5% RSD, reproducibility between laboratories better than 10% RSD, bias better than 10%, and limits of detection between 0.03 and 9 μg g(-1) for the majority of the elements monitored. The figures of merit for the μ-XRF methods include repeatability better than 11% RSD, reproducibility between laboratories after normalization of the data better than 16% RSD, and limits of detection between 5.8 and 7,400 μg g(-1). The results from this study also compare the analytical performance of different forensic science laboratories conducting elemental analysis of glass evidence fragments using the three analytical methods.