4.7 Article

A comparison study on the use of Dowex 1 and TEVA-resin in determination of 99Tc in environmental and nuclear coolant samples in a SIA system with ICP-MS detection

Journal

TALANTA
Volume 184, Issue -, Pages 527-536

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2018.03.034

Keywords

Tc-99; TEVA resin; Dowex 1; Flow analysis; ICP-MS; Environmental analysis; Nuclear reactor coolant

Funding

  1. Polish National Research and Development Centre [8, 044-158]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This work refers to a comparative study of sorbents widely used in determinations of Tc-99 such as TEVA resin and Dowex 1. Despite having a similar functional group of quaternary amines, both materials represent different chromatographic methods extraction (TEVA resin) and anion exchange (Dowex 1) which provides a diverse range of their properties significant in determination of Tc-99 in flow conditions. The comparative tests, carried out in a SIA-LOV (Sequential Injection Analysis Lab-on-Valve) system combined with mass spectrometric (ICP-MS) detection, considered several factors that are crucial from the standpoint of resin's utility such as sorption capacity, durability, or selectivity, critical in Tc-99 separation from interferences. The developed and optimized analytical procedure based on the application of the TEVA resin provided determinations of Tc-99 at minimum detectable limit (MDL) 6.00 mBq L-1 in 50 min and has been successfully employed in analyses of samples from nuclear industrial and research units (reactor coolant and sewage) as well as from the river surrounding the nuclear reactor. The method proved to be sufficient for routine analysis of water samples in accordance with EPA standards. The reliability of the method was confirmed in the analysis of the BH standard provided by the NPL for inter-laboratory proficiency tests. The Tc-99 recovery for all real samples was evaluated as 80-100%.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available