4.7 Article

Interlaboratory study of novel halogenated flame retardants: INTERFLAB

期刊

ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 407, 期 22, 页码 6759-6769

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-015-8843-7

关键词

Interlaboratory comparison; Brominated flame retardants; Novel flame retardants; GC-MS; LC-MS

资金

  1. European Union [295138]
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  3. project Employment of Best Young Scientists for International Co-operation Empowerment [CZ.1.07/2.3.00/30.0037]
  4. European Social Fund
  5. state budget of the Czech Republic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Flame retardants (FRs) have come under considerable scientific and public scrutiny over the past decade. A lack of reference materials and standardized analytical methods has resulted in questions regarding the variation of measurements from different studies. We evaluated this variation by performing an international interlaboratory study assessing analytical capabilities as well as the accuracy and precision of results for a range of flame retardants (International Flame Retardant Laboratory Study, INTERFLAB). Thirteen international research laboratories participated in a blind interlaboratory comparison of 24 FRs. Results demonstrate good precision within replicates of test mixtures from individual laboratories, but problematic accuracy for several FRs and laboratories. Large ranges in the values reported for decabromodiphenylethane (DBDPE), tris(1,3-dichloropropyl)phosphate (TDCIPP), tetrabromobisphenol-A (TBBPA), and hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) (> 50 % relative standard deviations among measured values) and large deviations from the reference values (> 25 % bias in accuracy) suggest potential problems for comparability of results. DBDPE, HBCD, and TBBPA had significantly poorer accuracy and precision, suggesting that current analytical methods are not providing reliable results for these FRs.

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