hikinmike Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 I once worked in an analytic lab where we performed testing for metal concentrations using Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry and Inductively Coupled Plasma systems. The protocols for testing were assigned, and I never received an answer to the question, 'Why was one system superior for a particular element?" We had many 'lamps' for the AAS analyses, yet sometimes the directive was to use ICP. We were testing groundwater for elemental contaminants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koti Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 I'm no expert on this but I suspect that varying properties of different metals or other elements/compounds you were looking to find in water require different furnace specifications. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 There are quite a few differences in performance. For example ICP has higher dynamic range and can run more easily unattended. Also, they differ in sensitivity for different metals. For standard analyses the most important bit are established and certified protocols. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 14 hours ago, CharonY said: Also, they differ in sensitivity for different metals. Clearly, but I think the OP's question was "Why?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, John Cuthber said: Clearly, but I think the OP's question was "Why?" Hmm i read it as why one instrument got chosen over the other. But if that is the question then the basic answer is that for refractory elements the necessary temps are often not reached even with GFAA. That being said, practically it also depends on overall method development, but also the type of ICP. Another aspect, depending on sample, are e.g. spectral interference, where the performance of the detector would determine the respective quality of the results (but which would not be an issue in ICP-MS, for example). Edited November 7, 2017 by CharonY 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hikinmike Posted November 16, 2017 Author Share Posted November 16, 2017 Thanks to all. More info than I ever received from management when doing those analyses. Will now use your suggestions as a starting point for my net search. Ahh...retirement and free time. Savoring it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now