Quantitative X-ray diffraction analysis of quartz in bulk samples: outcomes of an international interlaboratory test on three standardized methods

The quantification of crystalline silica (quartz) in materials helps communicate the potential risk of exposure when the materials are then included in a work process that could generate an aerosol of particulate. Although many analytical laboratories have developed procedures for quantification of quartz in bulk samples, these procedures are not standardized and are generally limited to their individual needs. Therefore, the International Standards Organization (ISO) working group for silica measurement (ISO/TC146/SC2/WG7 Silica) developed an international standard that describes 3 analytical methods for the determination of quartz in bulk samples by X-ray diffraction (XRD): the external standard method for samples prepared on filters, the internal standard method, and the spiking method. This paper describes the results of an interlaboratory measurement comparison in which the 3 XRD standardized methods were evaluated to verify if the 3 methods produce results that agree with each other. Simple analytical systems, represented by 4 binary mixtures of quartz added to another mineral, were prepared. Sub-samples of the 4 test powders were delivered to the 7 participating laboratories from 6 countries that agreed to participate in this study. The precision of each measurement method, calculated as a percentage of quartz weight within the range 10 to 16 wt%, was similar for the 3 XRD methods. The repeatability SDs, sr, ranged between 0.4 and 0.8 (relative SD, RSDr, between 4.3% and 8.7%) for thin specimens on filter, 0.4 to 1.1 (RSDr between 4.2% and 10.6%) for the internal standard method, and 0.3 to 1.2 (RSDr between 3.7% and 11.9%) for the spiking method. The reproducibility SDs, sR, of the results in the studied wt% range were between 1.1 and 2.1 (RSDR between 12.7% and 21.5%) for the method of thin specimen on filter, 1.1 to 1.4 (RSDR between 7.5% and 14.1%) for the internal standard method and 1.1 to 2.6 (RSDR between 9.5% and 23.7%) for the spiking method. These methods obtained equivalent results at 2 concentration levels of 10% and 16% in these binary mixtures. A further step of interlaboratory testing should be implemented to investigate the performance of the 3 methods at the lower quartz concentration values.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Annals of Work Exposures and Health
Published
2025-11-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxaf084
Primary Topic
Occupational and environmental lung diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quantitative X-ray diffraction analysis of quartz in bulk samples: outcomes of an international interlaboratory test on three standardized methods

Darren Musgrove, Rachel Walker, Viola Schmidt, Peter Stacey et al.
Annals of Work Exposures and Health
Occupational and environmental lung diseases
article

Quantitative X-ray diffraction analysis of quartz in bulk samples: outcomes of an international interlaboratory test on three standardized methods

Darren Musgrove, Rachel Walker, Viola Schmidt, Peter Stacey, Steve Clark, Gilles Mertens, Markus Mattenklott, Emanuele Cauda, Céline Eypert-Blaison, Marco Mecchia, Frank Luetzenkirchen
article en

Abstract

The quantification of crystalline silica (quartz) in materials helps communicate the potential risk of exposure when the materials are then included in a work process that could generate an aerosol of particulate. Although many analytical laboratories have developed procedures for quantification of quartz in bulk samples, these procedures are not standardized and are generally limited to their individual needs. Therefore, the International Standards Organization (ISO) working group for silica measurement (ISO/TC146/SC2/WG7 Silica) developed an international standard that describes 3 analytical methods for the determination of quartz in bulk samples by X-ray diffraction (XRD): the external standard method for samples prepared on filters, the internal standard method, and the spiking method. This paper describes the results of an interlaboratory measurement comparison in which the 3 XRD standardized methods were evaluated to verify if the 3 methods produce results that agree with each other. Simple analytical systems, represented by 4 binary mixtures of quartz added to another mineral, were prepared. Sub-samples of the 4 test powders were delivered to the 7 participating laboratories from 6 countries that agreed to participate in this study. The precision of each measurement method, calculated as a percentage of quartz weight within the range 10 to 16 wt%, was similar for the 3 XRD methods. The repeatability SDs, sr, ranged between 0.4 and 0.8 (relative SD, RSDr, between 4.3% and 8.7%) for thin specimens on filter, 0.4 to 1.1 (RSDr between 4.2% and 10.6%) for the internal standard method, and 0.3 to 1.2 (RSDr between 3.7% and 11.9%) for the spiking method. The reproducibility SDs, sR, of the results in the studied wt% range were between 1.1 and 2.1 (RSDR between 12.7% and 21.5%) for the method of thin specimen on filter, 1.1 to 1.4 (RSDR between 7.5% and 14.1%) for the internal standard method and 1.1 to 2.6 (RSDR between 9.5% and 23.7%) for the spiking method. These methods obtained equivalent results at 2 concentration levels of 10% and 16% in these binary mixtures. A further step of interlaboratory testing should be implemented to investigate the performance of the 3 methods at the lower quartz concentration values.

Annals of Work Exposures and HealthVol. 70(2)
Capgemini (Netherlands) (NL), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (US), HSE Science and Research Centre (GB), Istituto Nazionale per l'Assicurazione Contro gli Infortuni sul Lavoro (IT), Institute of Occupational Medicine (GB), Institut für Arbeitsschutz der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (DE), Quinnipiac University (US), Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité (FR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 40%
Occupational and environmental lung diseases
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.