Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T02:45:26.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Milling effects upon quantitative determinations of chrysotile asbestos by the reference intensity ratio method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

L. De Stefano ,
F. De Luca ,
G. Buccolieri  and
P. Plescia
L. De Stefano
Affiliation:
Area Ambiente - ENEL Ricerca, I-72100 Brindisi, Italy
F. De Luca
Affiliation:
Area Ambiente - ENEL Ricerca, I-72100 Brindisi, Italy
G. Buccolieri
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Lecce, Dip. Scienza dei Materiali, I-73100 Lecce, Italy
P. Plescia
Affiliation:
Instituto Trattamento Minerali, CNR- I-00160 Roma, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As is well known from literature, the grinding process, which is an unavoidable step in sample preparation, may strongly modify the physical properties of chrysotile through amorphisation. The aim of this work is to establish the proper milling time to apply to the samples before an accurate X-ray powder diffraction quantitative analysis. We have used the RIR (reference intensity ratio) analytical method, based on the measurement of the ratio I/Is between the intensity of the strongest line of an analyte and the intensity of the analytical peak of a standard material, when they are thoroughly mixed 50:50 by weight. We have studied how the RIR value changes as a function of the milling time of the sample and how the accuracy of this quantitative method is affected.

Keywords

asbestoschrysotileRIRquantitative analysis
Type
Technical Articles
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 26 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, L.and Klug, H. P. (1948). “X-ray diffraction analysis of crystalline dusts,” Anal. Chem. 20, 886–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bish, D. L. and Reynolds, R. C. (1989). “Sample preparation for XRD,” in Modern Powder Diffraction, Volume 20, edited by D. L. Bish and J. E. Post (The Mineralogical Society of America), pp. 73-97, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Chung, F. H. (1974). “Quantitative interpretation of X-ray diffraction patterns. I. Matrix-flushing method of quantitative multicomponent analysis,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 7, 519–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullity, B.D. (1978). Elements of X-ray Diffraction, 2nd ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
Dunn, H. W.and Stewart, J. H. (1982). “Determination of chrysotile asbestos in building materials by X-ray diffractometry,” Anal. Chem. 54, 1122–1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gualtieri, A.and Artioli, G. (1995). “Quantitative determination of chrysotile asbestos in bulk materials by combined Rietveld and RIR methods,” Powder Diffr. 10, 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hriljac, J. A., Eylem, C., Petrakis, L., Hu, R., and Block, J. (1996). “Use of X-ray powder diffraction for determining low level of chrysotile asbestos in gypsum-based bulk materials: Sample preparation,” Anal. Chem. 68, 3112–3120.Google Scholar
Hubbard, C. R.and Snyder, R. L. (1993). “RIR measurement and use in quantitative XRD,” in Methods & Practices in XRPD, JCPDS 11.2, 1–4.Google Scholar
Hurst, V. J., Schroeder, P. A., and Styron, R. W. (1997). “Accurate quantification of quartz and other phases by powder X-ray diffractometry,” Anal. Chim. Acta 337, 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plecia, P., Maccari, D., and Marabini, A. (1995). “Inertizzazione dei rifiuti contenenti amianto mediante processo termodistruttivo e riciclo dgli inerti per produrre materiali ceramici per filtri catalitici,” Acqua-Aria 27, 1041–1046.Google Scholar