2015
DOI: 10.1021/es504533e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Uncertainty Evaluation of the Diffusive Gradients in Thin Films Technique

Abstract: Although the analytical performance of the diffusive gradients in thin films (DGT) technique is well investigated, there is no systematic analysis of the DGT measurement uncertainty and its sources. In this study we determine the uncertainties of bulk DGT measurements (not considering labile complexes) and of DGT-based chemical imaging using laser ablation - inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. We show that under well-controlled experimental conditions the relative combined uncertainties of bulk DGT m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

4
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
21
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The results obtained using the DGT method are more consistent (the standard error is up to 10 %) (Kreuzeder et al 2015) than the results for the total and the watersoluble concentrations of the tested elements, where the standard errors are high owing to large inhomogeneity of the forest soil. The DGT approach minimizes the effect of the soil inhomogeneity (Zhang et al 1998).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…The results obtained using the DGT method are more consistent (the standard error is up to 10 %) (Kreuzeder et al 2015) than the results for the total and the watersoluble concentrations of the tested elements, where the standard errors are high owing to large inhomogeneity of the forest soil. The DGT approach minimizes the effect of the soil inhomogeneity (Zhang et al 1998).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…Simulation runs with and without DBL were performed for investigating the effect of solute species ( D water , D gel ), r phys , Δ g , and δ on solute diffusion through the DBL. As we expected the ratio of the diffusion coefficients, D gel / D water , to determine the effect of the diffusion coefficient, arsenate ( D water = 9.05 × 10 –6 cm 2 s –1 , D gel = 5.93 × 10 –6 cm 2 s –1 ) 15 , 16 and Cd ( D water = 7.17 × 10 –6 cm 2 s –1 , D gel = 6.09 × 10 –6 cm 2 s –1 ) 6 , 15 , 20 were chosen as additional solutes to cover a wide range of D gel / D water ratios. Potential differences in the flux decrease due to the DBL in the 1D and 3D situation were evaluated using where the index DBL denotes a specific DBL thickness, while the index “0” denotes δ = 0. f DBL / f 0 is the sampler flux decrease caused by the presence of the DBL.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in a more extensive consideration of the uncertainty budget of DGT-LA-ICPMS analysis we showed that relative combined standard uncertainties of up to 45% have to be expected for the analysis of SPR-IDA-Zr-hydroxide gels, with the major uncertainty contributors being the normalised signal and the intercept of the calibration [179].…”
Section: Internal Normalisation and Analytical Precisionmentioning
confidence: 94%