Abstract
Intralaboratory and interlaboratory investigations were used to evaluate the precision and accuracy of point counting versus visual estimation of asbestos in friable bulk materials. Interlaboratory analyses revealed that the commonly used “equivalent” visual-estimation methods were significantly less accurate than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 400-point-count method, especially at low asbestos concentrations. In an effort to produce a method that is statistically “equivalent” yet less time consuming than the EPA method, several strategies were assessed to reduce preparation and analysis time. False negatives were produced by schemes that unconditionally reduced the number of slides/points analyzed. The best modification was a stratified scheme in which effort was inversely proportional to the Percentage of asbestos in a sample, Although precision was sacrificed at higher concentrations, that precision was deemed superfluous because such materials were categorically asbestos-containing material...
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.
