**5. Atomic spectroscopy: detection limits**

The detection limits are important parameters of analytical techniques. Typical detection limit ranges for the major atomic spectroscopy techniques are shown in **Figure 5**. AAS detection limits are generally better in all cases where the element can be atomized. Detection limits for refractory elements such as bor, titanium, and vanadium are better by ICP than by AAS. Nonmetals and the halogens can only be determined by ICP. Optimum detection of nonmetals such as sulfur, nitrogen, and halogens by ICP-ES can only be achieved when a vacuum monochromator is used. For mercury and those elements that form hydrides, the cold vapor mercury or hydride generation techniques offer exceptional detection limits [14].

**7**

**Figure 6.**

shown in **Table 3**.

*Atomic Spectroscopy*

**Figure 5.**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89269*

**6. Atomic spectroscopy: analytical working range**

*Typical detection limit ranges for the major atomic spectroscopy techniques.*

ranges with a single set of instrumental conditions [15].

**7. Atomic spectroscopy: interferences**

*Analytical working ranges for the major atomic spectroscopy techniques.*

The analytical working range can be considered as the concentration range over which quantitative results can be obtained without recalibration for system. Selecting a technique with an analytical working range based on the expected analyte concentrations, minimizes the analysis times by allowing the samples with different analyte concentrations to be analyzed together. For example; ICP-MS, once considered only an ultratrace element technique, can now run concentration ranges from low parts-per-trillion (ppt) level up to high parts per million (ppm). A wide analytical working range also can reduce, for example handling requirements, minimizing potential errors. **Figure 6** shows typical analytical working

*Spectroscopic* interferences have been determined and documented, and methods have been used to correct or compensate for those interferences which may occur. For example; ICP-AES provides a wide dynamic range and minimal chemical interferences [15]. A summary of the types of interferences seen with atomic spectroscopy techniques, and the corresponding methods of compensation are

**Figure 5.**

*Modern Spectroscopic Techniques and Applications*

mathematically transforming the signal [11] (**Table 2**).

**4. Atomic spectroscopy: sample preparation**

response, amplificating the transducer's signal, removing noise by filtering, or

An ideal sample preparation should remove interfering components from the matrix and to adjust of analyte to facilitate the actual measurement. Methods for destruction of the organic matrix by simple heating or by acid digestion have been developed and are thoroughly approved. Microwave heating is used for this purpose, with the specifically designed a compatible *equipment* to avoid dangerous of excessive pressure within reaction flask. Although the number of samples that can be processed is not large, microwave heating affords rapid digestion and low reagent blanks. More recent developments include continuous flow systems for automated digestion which has a direct link with the instrument [12]. Liquid-liquid portioning has been widely applied for preconcentration procedure. Analyte atoms in a large volume of aqueous solution are complexed with a suitable agent and collected into a small volume of solvent. Vapor generation procedures permit the rapid introduction of 100% of the sample into the atomizer and are used for AAS, AES, AFS, and ICP-MS. Certain elements such as arsenic, selenium, and bismuth readily evolve gaseous hydrides and transferred by a flow of inert gas to an AES, and ICP-MS or to a heated silica tube positioned in the light path for AAS, AFS. The tube can be heated using the air-acetylene flame or an electric current. The obtained heat is enough to cause decomposition of the hydride and atomization of the analyte. Thus, there is no loss off analyte, which in all the atoms flow the light path with in few seconds and they are trapped within the silica tube that was retarded their dispersion. Any sample volume added to the reaction container, hydride generation AAS has detection limits a few nanograms of analyte. Mercury can quickly form a vapor in the ambient temperature, and this property is the basis for cold vapor generation. When a reducing agent is added to sample solution, Hg2+ converts to the elemental mercury. Agitation or bubbling of gas through the solution is used to enhance rapid vaporization of the atomic mercury and to improve the transfer of mercury to a flow through cell located in the light path. As with hydride generation, the detection limit is a few nanogram and some manufacturers have been developed common instrumentation to accomplish both procedures. Chromatographic or electrophoretic techniques have been also developed that are coupled

directly to the atomic spectroscopic instrument to develop integrated analytical

The detection limits are important parameters of analytical techniques. Typical detection limit ranges for the major atomic spectroscopy techniques are shown in **Figure 5**. AAS detection limits are generally better in all cases where the element can be atomized. Detection limits for refractory elements such as bor, titanium, and vanadium are better by ICP than by AAS. Nonmetals and the halogens can only be determined by ICP. Optimum detection of nonmetals such as sulfur, nitrogen, and halogens by ICP-ES can only be achieved when a vacuum monochromator is used. For mercury and those elements that form hydrides, the cold vapor mercury or hydride generation techniques offer exceptional detection

**6**

limits [14].

arrangements [13].

**5. Atomic spectroscopy: detection limits**

*Typical detection limit ranges for the major atomic spectroscopy techniques.*
