高分辨率连续光源原子吸收法和离子色谱法测定水中氟化物的比较

Comparative study on determination of fluoride in water by high-resolution continuum source atomic absorption spectrometry and ion chromatography

目的比较高分辨率连续光源原予吸收法（HR-CS-AAS）和离子色谱法（IC）测定水中氟化物。方法用离子色谱和高分辨率连续光源原子吸收分别测定水样及进行加标回收实验,比较两者的检测限、精密度、准确度等指标。并采用配对t检验检查2种方法测定水中氟的结果是否有显著差异。结果离子色谱法检测限为20μg/L,RSD为2.0%~4.3%,加标回收率为96.0%~103%。原子吸收法检测限为42μg/L,RSD为1.7%~3.6%,加标回收率为96.5%~106%。离子色谱和原子吸收法同时测定24份实际水样,测定结果进行配对t检验,结果表明2法测定水中氟差异无统计学意义。结论高分辨率连续光源原子吸收法可用于测定水中氟,相对于离子色谱法,原子吸收法具备样品处理简单、节省时间、适合大批量样品测定的特点。

Objective To compare the high-resolution continuum source atomic absorption spectrometry（HRCS-AAS） method with the ion chromatography（IC） method for determination of fluoride in water.Methods The HRCS-AAS method and IC method were used separately to detect fluoride in water and the characteristics of the two methods were compared.Result In IC method,the limit of detection was 20 p-g/L;the RSD was 2.0%-4.3%;the average recovery rate was 96.0%-103%.In HR-CS-AAS method,the limit of detection was 42 p,g/L;the RSD was 1.7%-3.6%;the average recovery rate was 96.5%-106%.While the fluoride contents of 24 water samples were detected by using the IC method and HR-CS-AAS method,and the results as matched data were tested with t-test,there was no statistically significant difference between the two methods（P=0.16）.Conclusion The HR-CS-AAS method is suitable for determination of fluoride in water,because it is simpler and quicker than the IC method.