Franklin R Guenther et al 2007 Metrologia 44 08004 doi:10.1088/0026-1394/44/1A/08004
Franklin R Guenther1, Walter R Miller1, David L Duewer1, Gwi Suk Heo2, Yong-Doo Kim2, Adriaan M H van der Veen3, Leonid Konopelko4, Yury Kustikov4, Nina Shor4, Chris Brookes5, Martin Milton5, Florbela Dias6 and Han Qiao7
Show affiliationsThis key comparison was intended to compare the capabilities for the preparation and value assignment of gas standards for hydrogen sulfide in nitrogen, maintained at the participating national metrology institutes. The range of the nominal amount-of-substance fractions of the comparison standard is 10 µmol/mol, which is close to regulatory levels in most countries.
The measurements in this key comparison took place in 2005. There were 7 participants. The KCRV was calculated from the participants' data, and thus represents a consensus value. This was necessary due to the fact that the cylinders could not be prepared gravimetrically as hydrogen sulfide may be absorbed onto the walls of the cylinder, and has been shown to be unstable in cylinders at the comparison concentration. Thus the gas mixtures were procured from a vendor as a homogeneous lot of 12 cylinders, analyzed by the coordinating laboratory for 6 months to determine stability, and then those determined to be stable were shipped to the participants for analysis. After analysis, the cylinders were returned to the coordinating laboratory for reanalysis. Through this protocol the coordinating laboratory could track stability. In parallel, the coordinating laboratory also analyzed a stable reference, a hydrogen sulfide gas mixture that had been shown to be stable over many years. Using the lot stability data, the participant's analytical results, and the coordinating laboratories' analysis of the stable reference, a consensus value could be calculated which represents the concentration of the stable reference.
The key comparison demonstrated that the results of the laboratories agreed within 0.5% relative to the consensus value. A subset of 6 participants' results agreed with the consensus value to better than 0.25%.
Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.
The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).
Issue 1A ( 1 January 2007)
Franklin R Guenther et al 2007 Metrologia 44 08004
Nicolas Moeller and Martin Schnabl JHEP01(2004)011
Jonelle L. Walsh et al. 2008 The Astronomical Journal 136 1677
H Araújo et al 2007 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 66 012003
2009 Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 17 089901
G Ratel and C Michotte 2003 Metrologia 40 06008
C A DeJoseph Jr et al 2008 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 41 085701
Babak Ebrahimi et al 2009 Smart Mater. Struct. 18 015017
Sara Campos et al 2009 Metrologia 46 01004
E Castaños-Martínez et al 2009 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 42 012003