电感耦合等离子体质谱法与液体激光荧光法分析水中铀的比较  

Comparison of methods for analysis of Uranium in water by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and liquid laser fluorescence

作　　者：黄微 高鹏 宫增艳[1] HUANG Wei;GAO Peng;GONG Zengyan(Beijing Radiation Safety Technology Center,Beijing 100089 China)

机构地区：[1]北京市辐射安全技术中心

出　　处：《中国辐射卫生》2019年第5期569-571,共3页Chinese Journal of Radiological Health

摘　　要：目的建立微波消解、电感耦合等离子体质谱(ICP-MS)测定水中铀的方法,并与液体激光荧光法进行比较。方法应用建立的微波消解、电感耦合等离子体质谱法(ICP-MS)和液体激光荧光法分别测定不同水样中的铀含量。结果液体激光荧光法和ICP-MS法的检出限分别为0.021μg·L-1和0.003μg·L-1,测定结果的标准偏差范围分别为1.20%~4.24%和0.78%~3.46%,精密度分别为3.02%和0.71%,采用两种方法对实际样品进行分析,结果吻合。结论 ICP-MS测量水中铀的检出限低,精密度和准确度更高,但仪器昂贵,测量成本高,因此每个实验室要根据实际条件及样品含铀量大小选择分析方法。Objective To establish a method for the determination of Uranium in water by microwave digestion and ICP-MS, and compare it with the liquid laser fluorescence method.Methods The Uranium contents in different water samples were determined by the ICP-MS after microwave digestion and the liquid laser fluorescence method.Results The detection limits of liquid laser fluorescence and ICP-MS were 0.021 μg·L-1 and 0.003 μg·L-1, respectively. The standard deviations of the two measurements were 1.20%~4.24 % and 0.78%~3.46 %, and their precisions was 3.02% and 0.71%, respectively. The actual samples were analyzed by the two methods, their results were in good agreement.Conclusion The detection limit of Uranium in water by ICP-MS is low, and its precision and accuracy are higher, but the instrument is expensive. Therefore, each laboratory should select the analysis method according to the actual conditions and the Uranium content of the sample.

关 键 词：电感耦合等离子体质谱法 液体激光荧光法 铀 方法比较 

分 类 号：X832[环境科学与工程—环境工程]