4.7 Article

Flow injection on-line minicolumn preconcentration and determination of trace copper ions using an alumina/titanium oxide grafted silica matrix and FAAS

期刊

MICROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 178, 期 1-2, 页码 61-70

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00604-012-0807-4

关键词

Preconcentration; Copper; Silica/Alumina/Titanium; Doehlert design; Water; Alcohol fuel

资金

  1. CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico)
  2. CAPES (Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior)
  3. FAPERJ (Fundacao Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro)
  4. UFRJ (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro)
  5. Parana Araucaria Foundation (Fundacao Araucaria do Parana)
  6. FAEPE-UEL
  7. INCT for Bioanalytics (Instituto Nacional de Ciencia e Tecnologia de Bioanalitica)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe the analytical performance of a hybrid material composed of SiO2, Al2O3 and TiO2. It was prepared by a sol-gel process and can act as an adsorbent in the continuous-flow enrichment of copper. A minicolumn was packed with the material, copper ions are adsorbed at pH 9.13, then eluted with 1.0 mol L-1 nitric acid, and determined by FAAS. The material was characterized by infrared spectroscopy, scanning electron and energy dispersive spectroscopy, energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence analysis, powder X-ray diffraction, and specific surface area analysis. No significant interference was observed for most ions in up to copper/interferent ratios of 1:100 and of 1:500 in case of Ca(II), Ba(II), and Mg(II). The breakthrough capacity is 1.4 mg g(-1) under dynamic conditions. The limits of detection and of quantification are 0.50 and 1.4 mu g L-1, respectively, and the calibration plot is linear in the range from 5.0 to 245.0 mu g L-1 (r = 0.999). The relative standard deviation is 3.20 (for n = 7 and at a Cu(II) concentration of 10 mu g L-1). The method was applied to the determination of trace copper ions in water, vegetable and alcohol fuel samples.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据