Abstract
AbstractA major aspect of lead hazard control is the evaluation of soil lead hazards around housing coated with lead‐based paint. The use of field‐portable X‐ray fluorescence (FPXRF) to do detailed surveying, with limited laboratory confirmation, can provide lead measurements in soil (especially for planning abatement activities) in a far more cost‐efficient and timely manner than laboratory analysis. To date, one obstacle to the acceptance of FPXRF as an approved method of measuring lead in soil has been a lack of correspondence between field and laboratory results. In order to minimize the differences between field and laboratory results, RTI International (RTI) has developed a new protocol for field drying and sieving soil samples for field measurement by FPXRF. To evaluate this new protocol, composite samples were collected in the field following both U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines and ASTM International (ASTM) protocols, measured after drying by FPXRF, and returned to the laboratory for confirmatory inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP‐AES) analysis. Evaluation of study data from several diverse sites revealed no statistical difference between paired FPXRF and ICP‐AES measurements using the new method. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
