Analytical procedure precision

For analytical procedures, precision may be specified as either intralaboratory (within-laboratory) or interlaboratory (between-laboratory) precision. Estimates... 

The simple equipment used for a typical titration is shown in Figure 1. A sample is measured into the flask from a pipette, or by weighing. The accuracy and precision of manual titrations using visual indicators is critically dependent on the use of correct experimental technique by the analyst. As in most analytical procedures, precise measurement of the amount of sample (or sample aliquot) is necessary, but it is most important in titrimetry if an accuracy of <0.2% is to be achieved. Thus, proper use of the pipette, burette, and balance, and a careful sample preparation procedure is crucial. Measurement devices of high quality, such as class A pipettes and burettes, should be used. 

An analytical procedure is often tested on materials of known composition. These materials may be pure substances, standard samples, or materials analyzed by some other more accurate method. Repeated determinations on a known material furnish data for both an estimate of the precision and a test for the presence of a constant error in the results. The standard deviation is found from Equation 12 (with the known composition replacing /x). A calculated value for t (Eq. 14) in excess of the appropriate value in Table 2.27 is interpreted as evidence of the presence of a constant error at the indicated level of significance. 

If improvement in precision is claimed for a set of measurements, the variance for the set against which comparison is being made should be placed in the numerator, regardless of magnitude. An experimental F smaller than unity indicates that the claim for improved precision cannot be supported. The technique just given for examining whether the precision varies with the two different analytical procedures, also serves to compare the precision with different materials, or with different operators, laboratories, or sets of equipment. 

In practice, however, any improvement in the sensitivity of an acid-base titration due to an increase in k is offset by a decrease in the precision of the equivalence point volume when the buret needs to be refilled. Consequently, standard analytical procedures for acid-base titrimetry are usually written to ensure that titrations require 60-100% of the buret s volume. 

Although isotope-dilution analysis can be very accurate, a number of precautions need to be taken. Some of these are obvious ones that any analytical procedure demands. For example, analyte preparation for both spiked and unspiked sample must be as nearly identical as possible the spike also must be intimately mixed with the sample before analysis so there is no differential effect on the subsequent isotope ration measurements. The last requirement sometimes requires special chemical treatment to ensure that the spike element and the sample element are in the same chemical state before analysis. However, once procedures have been set in place, the highly sensitive isotope-dilution analysis gives excellent precision and accuracy for the estimation of several elements at the same time or just one element. 

The function of the analyst is to obtain a result as near to the true value as possible by the correct application of the analytical procedure employed. The level of confidence that the analyst may enjoy in his results will be very small unless he has knowledge of the accuracy and precision of the method used as well as being aware of the sources of error which may be introduced. Quantitative analysis is not simply a case of taking a sample, carrying out a single determination and then claiming that the value obtained is irrefutable. It also requires a sound knowledge of the chemistry involved, of the possibilities of interferences from other ions, elements and compounds as well as of the statistical distribution of values. The purpose of this chapter is to explain some of the terms employed and to outline the statistical procedures which may be applied to the analytical results. 

The comparison of the values obtained from a set of results with either (a) the true value or (b) other sets of data makes it possible to determine whether the analytical procedure has been accurate and/or precise, or if it is superior to another method. 

The precision of an analytical procedure expresses the closeness of agreement (degree of scatter) between a series of measurements obtained from multiple sampling of the same homogeneous sample under the prescribed conditions. Precision may be considered at three levels repeatability (within run) intermediate precision (over time) and reproducibility (inter-laboratory). 

The quantitation limit of an individual analytical procedure is the lowest amount of analyte in a sample, which can be quantitatively determined with suitable precision and accuracy. 

The range of an analytical procedure is the interval between the upper and lower concentration (amounts) of analyte in the sample (including these concentrations) for which it has been demonstrated that the analytical procedure has a suitable level of precision, accuracy and linearity. 

Most often studies will be accepted by regulatory authorities even if they do not contain all information. For example, a summary, the scope, a separate notice regarding the residue definition or a schematic diagram of the analytical procedure are helpful and may avoid additional questions, but they are not essential. Also, detailed specification of standard glassware or chemicals commonly used in residue analysis is less important. Finally, data about extraction efficiency or analyte stability can be offered in separate studies or statements, which are also valid for other methods. However, each method must precisely describe at the minimum ... 

Analytical methods, particularly those used by accredited laboratories, have to be validated according to official rules and regulations to characterize objectively their reliability in any special field of application (Wegscheider [1996] EURACHEM/WELAC [1993]). Validation has to control the performance characteristics of analytical procedures (see Chap. 7) such as accuracy, precision, sensitivity, selectivity, specificity, robustness, ruggedness, and limit values (e.g., limit of detection, limit of quantitation). 

As a measuring science, analytical chemistry has to guarantee the quality of its results. Each kind of measurement is objectively affected by uncertainties which can be composed of random scattering and systematic deviations. Therefore, the measured results have to be characterized with regard to their quality, namely both the precision and accuracy and - if relevant - their information content (see Sect. 9.1). Also analytical procedures need characteristics that express their potential power regarding precision, accuracy, sensitivity, selectivity, specificity, robustness, and detection limit. 

Precision of an analytical procedure is commonly expressed by an average relative standard deviation (e.g., the precision of the determination of Mn in steel by XRF in a given routine control is 1.5% ). 

Precision of a complete analytical procedure, i.e., a standard operation procedure (SOP), should be characterized by the uncertainty of measurement (absolute or relative) as exactly as validation it stipulates. 

The interpretation is similar to that of the precision of analytical procedures. 

A quantitative term to describe the (lack of) precision of an analytical procedure (e.g. by standard deviation). 

Analytical procedures are classified as being compendial or non-compendial in character. Compendial methods are considered to be valid, but their suitability should be verified under actual conditions of use. To do so, one verifies several analytical performance parameters, such as the selectivity/specificity of the method, the stability of the sample solutions, and evaluations of intermediate precision. 

The introduction of high-resolution, high-efficiency /-ray detectors composed of lithium-drifted germanium crystals has revolutionised /-measurement techniques. Thus, /-spectrometry allows the rapid measurement of relatively low-activity samples without complex analytical preparations. A technique described by Michel et al. [25] uses Ge(Li) /-ray detectors for the simultaneous measurements of 228radium and 226radium in natural waters. This method simplifies the analytical procedures and reduces the labour while improving the precision, accuracy, and detection limits. 

The fact that soil always contains water, or more precisely an aqueous solution, is extremely important to keep in mind when carrying out an analytical procedure because water can adversely affect analytical procedures and instrumentation. This can result in an over- or under-determination of the concentrations of components of interest. Deactivation of chromatographic adsorbents and columns and the destruction of sampling tools such as salt windows used in infrared spectroscopy are examples of the potential deleterious effects of water. This can also result in absorbance or overlap of essential analytical bands in various regions of the spectrum. 

Solutions and precipitates were analyzed on a Beckman Spectra-Span VI direct current plasma emission spectrophotometer (DCP), Precision for the Ca2 + analyses was 3% and for the Ba2 + 2% except for the most dilute samples In which It rose as high as 5%. Calcite mineralogy was determined on a Philips x-ray diffractometer calcite was the only phase recorded except In speed runs of under one hour In duration (not Included In this study) which produced vaterite. Details of analytic procedures are available In Pingitore and Eastman (30,31). 

In a situation where the same sample has been analysed by two separate techniques altogether, each of them repeated several times, and that the mean values obtained are not the same statistically it may be possible to ascertain whether the analytical procedure adopted has been either accurate and precise or if it is superior to one of the two methods. 

---