Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment (한국지하수토양환경학회지:지하수토양환경)

Korean Society of Soil and Groundwater Environment (한국지하수토양환경학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Subsampling Error Associated with Analysis of Explosive Compounds in Soil

화약물질 오염토양의 부시료 제조방법에 따른 오차 비교

  • Bae, Bumhan (Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Gachon University)
  • Received : 2017.11.14
  • Accepted : 2017.12.14
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Six soil subsampling methods were evaluated with explosive compounds-contaminated soils to quantify the variance associated with each method. The methods include modified grab sampling, simplified ripple splitting, fractional shoveling, coning & quatering, degenerate fractional shoveling, and rolling & quatering. All the methods resulted in significantly lower CV (coefficient of variation) of 1~5%, compared to common grab sampling that gave 8~98% of CV, possibly due to the reduction of grouping and segregation errors described by Gy sampling theory. Among the methods, simplified ripple splitting tends to result in lower explosive compounds concentrations, while the rolling & quatering gave the opposite result. Fractional shoveling method showed the least variance and the highest reproducibility in the analysis.

Keywords

References

  1. Cho, J.H., Bae, B., and Kim, K.H., 2009, Optimization of analytical conditions for the quantification of explosive compounds in soil using HPLC, J. Soil & Groundwater Env. 14(1), 51-60.
  2. Gerlach, R.W., Dobb, D.E., Raab, G.A., and Nocerino, J.M., 2002, Gy sampling theory in environmental studies 1. Assessing soil splitting protocols, J. Chemometr., 16, 321-328. https://doi.org/10.1002/cem.705
  3. Gerlach, R.W., Nocerino, J.M., Ramsey, C.A., and Venner, B.C., 2003, Gy sampling theory in environmental studies 2. Subsampling error estimates, Anal. Chim. Acta, 490, 159-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-2670(03)00568-3
  4. Gy, P.M. 1982, Sampling of particulates-Theory and practice, 2nd Ed., Amsterdam, Elsevier.
  5. Jenkins, T.F., Grand, D.L., Brar, G.S., Thorne, P.G., Schumacher, P.W., and Rannery, T.A., 1997, Sampling error associated with collection and analysis of soil samples at TNT-contminated sites, Field Anal. Chem. Tech., 1(3), 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6521(1997)1:3<151::AID-FACT5>3.0.CO;2-#
  6. Narizzano, R., Risso, F., Innocenti, R., Mollica, V., and Tortarolo, B., 2008, Soil subsampling in environmental sciences: the role of granulometry, J. Environ. Monitor., 10, 993-997. https://doi.org/10.1039/b806522p
  7. Nocerino, J.M., Schumacher, B.A., and Dary, C.C., 2005, Role of laboratory sampling devices and laboratory subsampling methods in representative sampling strategies. Environ. Forensics, 6, 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/15275920590913903
  8. Rasemann, W., 2000, Industrial Waste Dumps, Sampling and Analysis. In: Encyclopedia of Analytical Chemistry (Meyers, R.A., Ed.), John Wiley and Sons, Ltd, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
  9. Schumacher, B.A., Shine, K.C., Burton, J.V., and Papp, M.L., 1990, Comparison of three methods for soil homogenization, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 54, 1187-1190. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1990.03615995005400040046x
  10. Song, X. and Li, F., 2009, Dependence of particle size and size distribution on mechanical sensitivity and thermal stability of hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro-1,3,5-triazine, Defence Sci. J., 59(1), 37-42. https://doi.org/10.14429/dsj.59.1482
  11. Taylor, S., Lever, J., Walsh, M., Fadden, J., Perron, N., Bigl, S., Spanggord, R., Curnow, M., and Packer, B., 2010, Dissolution Rate, Weathering Mechanics, and Friability of TNT, Comp B, Tritonal, and Octol, US Army Corps of Engineers, ERDC/CRREL TR-10-2.
  12. US EPA, 2003, Guidance for Obtaining Representative Laboratory Analytical Subsamples from Particulate Laboratory Samples, Gerlach, R.W., and Nocerino, J.M., EPA/600/R-03/027.
  13. Walsh, M.E., Ramsey, C.A., and Jenkins, T.F., 2002, The effect of particle size reduction by grinding on subsampling variance for explosives residues in soil, Chemosphere, 49, 1267-1273. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(02)00528-3
  14. Walsh, M.E., Ramsey, C.A., Taylor, S., Hewitt, A.D., Bjella, K., and Collins, C.M., 2007, Subsampling variance for 2,4-DNT in firing point soils, Soil Sediment Contam., 16(5), 459-472. https://doi.org/10.1080/15320380701490259
  15. Walsh, M.R., Walsh, M.E., Gagnon, K., Hewitt, A.D., and Jenkins, T.F., 2014, Subsampling of soils containing energetic residues, Soil Sediment Contam., 23, 452-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/15320383.2014.838208
  16. Zhang, J. and Zhang, C., 2012, Sampling and sampling strategies for environmental analysis, Int. J. Environ. An. Ch., 92(4), 466-478. https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2011.581371
  17. Zhou, J., Zhao, J., Yuan, H., Meng, Y., Li, Y., Wu, L., and Xue, X., 2007, Comparison of UPLC and HPLC for determination of trans-10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid content in royal jelly by ultrasound- assissted extraction with internal standard, Chroma., 66, 185-190. https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-007-0305-8