- Joined
- Sep 9, 2018
- Messages
- 1,499
- Reaction score
- 1,128
In another thread the question of significant/insignificant decimal places reported in an ICP analysis was brought up. This raises the question that even though these labs are testing specifically for the hobby, are the results they are reporting actually geared toward the hobby? What level of decimal places are necessary for the hobbyist to make informed decisions without giving the hobbyist unnecessary information (noise)? In some cases, are the level of decimal places being reported even accurate?
In my quick search into this, it appears that Oceamo and ATI are providing reports that are much better geared toward the hobbyist than Triton or ICP-Analysis.com
Examples:
Triton
Should the decimal places reported in the Analysis match the decimal places of the Setpoint? All the results, with the exception of (F), are reported as *.00 anyway.
Should zeros be reported as zero, or non-detectable?
ICP-Analysis.com
How many of these decimal places are needed, if any? Again, the decimal places of the analysis do not match the decimal places of the limits.
Calcium when you drill into the report.
Cobalt when drilled into the report.
Should zeros be reported as zero, or non-detectable?
Is this even accurate? Should it be reported at 0.0 ppb, non-detectable?
Then there are results such as these...
Oceamo
Much better, maybe a little room for improvement. Decimal places mostly match between Measured and Ideal Values.
No Zeros, reported as n.n.
ATI
Best? From the one report I looked at all decimal places matched between the Value and Ideal Value.
No Zeros, reported as n.u.
In my quick search into this, it appears that Oceamo and ATI are providing reports that are much better geared toward the hobbyist than Triton or ICP-Analysis.com
Examples:
Triton
Should the decimal places reported in the Analysis match the decimal places of the Setpoint? All the results, with the exception of (F), are reported as *.00 anyway.
Should zeros be reported as zero, or non-detectable?
ICP-Analysis.com
How many of these decimal places are needed, if any? Again, the decimal places of the analysis do not match the decimal places of the limits.
Calcium when you drill into the report.
Cobalt when drilled into the report.
Should zeros be reported as zero, or non-detectable?
Is this even accurate? Should it be reported at 0.0 ppb, non-detectable?
Then there are results such as these...
Oceamo
Much better, maybe a little room for improvement. Decimal places mostly match between Measured and Ideal Values.
No Zeros, reported as n.n.
ATI
Best? From the one report I looked at all decimal places matched between the Value and Ideal Value.
No Zeros, reported as n.u.
Last edited: