Excavation is a common method to clean up areas with increased levels of metal contamination. Identifying the degree of soil contamination is normally done by a laboratory analysis but it could also be done using a portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (XRF) in the field. This project has investigated how well XRF results correlate with the results from the laboratory and how the water ratio affects the results in XRF measurement. The purpose has been to gain an increased knowledge of how soil samples should be handled to obtain a reliable XRF result. Data was compared between lab results and XRF results. Soil samples with different water ratios have been examined to see whether moist affect the XRF results. The results indicate that the reliability of XRF results depends on the metal being studied. The water ratio also affects the result to varying degrees depending on the metal. This study has involved arsenic, lead, nickel, copper and zinc. The main focus is on arsenic, and the results show no significant difference between the two aforementioned methods. There is however a significant difference at some water quotas, but the result correlate very well and can be estimated based on the equation calculated in the results. Results show that a portable XRF is a reliable instrument for dry samples of arsenic, but laboratory analysis should be used to confirm the results at low levels of arsenic close to the applicable limit values due to margin of error when measuring with a portable XRF.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-176884 |
| Date | January 2020 |
| Creators | Robertsson, Camilla |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Institutionen för ekologi, miljö och geovetenskap |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds