Optimization of the State verification scheme of instruments for measuring the content of organic components in liquid and solid substances and materials

he basis for three successive revisions of the State Verification Scheme for instruments measuring the content of organic components in liquid and solid substances and materials was the improvement of the State primary standard of units of mass (molar) fraction and mass (molar) concentration of organic components in liquid and solid substances and materials based on liquid and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry with isotope dilution and gravimetry. During each revision, the structure and content of the current document were critically analyzed and attempts were made to optimize the form and content of the State Verification Scheme and adapt one to the specific features of organic analysis. The historically established rules for constructing verification schemes (in accordance with the Standards of the Russian Federation) are well suited for describing the transfer of units of physical values, but have a significant gaps in terms of transferring units of quantity of a substance. The article presents an overview of the main changes which were introduced in the process of functioning and improvement of the State Primary Standard of units of mass (molar) fraction and mass (molar) concentration of organic components in liquid and solid substances and materials based on liquid and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry with isotope dilution and gravimetry from its inception to the present day. The causes and consequences of the changes are reflected. Special attention is paid to the role of State Verification Scheme in ensuring the equivalence of measurements and the formation of a metrological traceability chain to the basic SI unit – mole. The key role of CRMs of composition for metrological support in the field of organic analysis and the importance of harmonization of domestic and international concepts of ensuring the equivalence of measurements are noted. The obtained results are useful for realising the specifics of organic analysis and the features of metrological support for this area of measurements.

1. Mikheeva A. Yu., Krylov A. I. Improvement of the State Primary Standard in the field of organic analysis GET 208. Measurement Standards. Reference Materials, 20(4), 5–19 (2024). (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20915/2077-1177-2024-20-4-5-19

2. The International System of Units (SI). 9th edition 2019, Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, V3.01 (2024).

3. Mikheeva A. Yu., Tkachenko I. Yu., Krylov A. I. Traceability in organic analysis. Report 2: State Primary Standard in the field of organic analysis GET 208: limits of competence and scope of application. Measurement Standards. Reference Materials, 19(5), 7–33 (2023). https://doi.org/10.20915/2077-1177-2023-19-5-7-33 (In Russ.)

4. Ricci M. et al. CCQM-K102: Polybrominated diphenyl ethers in sediment. Metrologia, 54(1A), 08026 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/54/1A/08026

5. Mine Bilsel et al. CCQM-K138: Determination of aflatoxins (AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, AFG2 and Total AFs) in Dried Fig. Metrologia, 56(1A), 08008 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/56/1A/08008

6. Krylov A. I., Lazarenko E. R. About verification, calibration of devices, certification of methods and reliability of results of chemical analytical measurements. Analytics, 13(6), 428–435 (2023). (In Russ.) https://www.j-analytics.ru/files/article_pdf/10/ article_10148_602.pdf

7. Migal P. V., Sobina E. P. Application of Reference Materials for verification/calibration of general-purpose measuring instruments. Abstracts of VI International Scientific Conference “Reference Materials in measurement and technology”, Yekaterinburg, pp. 117–119 (2024). (In Russ.) https://www.rmjournal.ru

8. Kuzmenko Yu. V., Pronenko S. V. The paradox of demonstrating of traceability in post-soviet countries. World of Measurements, October (2011). available at: https://ria-stk.ru/mi/adetail.php?ID=53879&ysclid=may1ecsxjg722019826 (accessed: 06.06.2025). (In Russ.)

9. Lukashov E. Yu. Comparison of verification and calibration procedures. Chief metrologist, (6(99)), 18–37 (2017). (In Russ.)

10. Westwood S., Lippa K., Shimuzu Y. et al. Methods for the SI-traceable value assignment of the purity of organic compounds (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure and Applied Chemistry, 95(1), 1–77 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2020-0804

11. Katrice A. Lippa, David L. Duewer, Michael A. Nelson et al. The role of the CCQM OAWG in providing SI traceable calibrators for organic chemical measurements. Accreditation and Quality Assurance, 24, 407–415 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-019-01407-6

12. Mikheeva A. Yu. Measuring the purity of organic substances: general approaches and development of an optimal procedure for studying pure organic materials. Measurement Techniques, 67(8), 639–651 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11018-024-02384-0