4.7 Article

Improvements in precision of isotopic ratio measurements using laser ablation-multiple collector-ICP-mass spectrometry: reduction of changes in measured isotopic ratios

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL ATOMIC SPECTROMETRY
卷 18, 期 10, 页码 1283-1288

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/b305127g

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cu-65/Cu-63 and Fe-56/Fe-54 isotopic ratios for two metal reference materials (NIST SRM 976 and NIST SRM 665) have been measured by a laser ablation-multiple collector-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (LA-MC-ICPMS). A time resolved analysis (TRA) data acquisition technique was used to monitor the time profile in Cu-65/Cu-63 and Fe-56/Fe-54 isotopic ratios. An ArF excimer laser (193 nm) which produces pit sizes of 16-63 mm was used to ablate Cu and Fe from metal samples. Measured Cu-65/Cu-63 ratios increased systematically (1 similar to 2parts per thousand) with prolonged ablation, suggestive of isotopic fractionation during the laser ablation or ionisation process in the ICP. However, systematic increase in the measured Cu-65/Cu-63 ratio could be minimised down to < 1&PTSTHOUSND; level when a newly developed correction technique for slow response of a Faraday preamplifier (0.2 &SIM; 1 s) was applied. The resulting precision or repeatability of the isotopic ratio measurements was improved to the 0.7&PTSTHOUSND; level, which was almost half the level achieved by the conventional measurements. The validity of this correction technique was also demonstrated by the Fe-56/Fe-54 isotopic ratio measurement for metal Fe. The systematic increase in the measured Fe-56/Fe-54 ratio could also be minimised to the < 1parts per thousand level after the correction of slow response of the Faraday preamplifier. The data obtained here demonstrated that the time-dependent changes in measured isotopic ratios can be minimised by the careful control of the intensity change and correction of slow response of the Faraday preamplifier.

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