High-accuracy INAA on real samples

Journal Article · Sat Dec 31 04:00:00 EST 1994 · Transactions of the American Nuclear Society

OSTI ID:88957

Becker, D A

The interest in quality assurance (QA), total quality management (TQM), and laboratory accreditation is currently an active topic for discussion. Many people are talking about and writing papers and articles about how all these {open_quotes}new{close_quotes} concepts are going to really make a difference and make all of their data much better. The question is, do we expect to see a real difference in the {open_quotes}quality{close_quotes} of the data coming out of these laboratories? My concern is that many of these {open_quotes}quality systems{close_quotes} appear to be focused primarily on developing rigid methods and procedures that detail step-by-step instructions to cover {open_quotes}all{close_quotes} possibilities, thus eliminating operator error. This also largely eliminates operator judgment and, often, operator motivation. I believe that the most important part of the analytical system is the person doing the work. Further, in my experience, the quality of the analytical results can be judged very well if the person who is doing the analysis is known. This is true especially for activation analysis.

• OSTI ID: 88957
• Report Number(s): CONF-941102--
• Journal Information: Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, Journal Name: Transactions of the American Nuclear Society Vol. 71; ISSN TANSAO; ISSN 0003-018X
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

40 CHEMISTRY
CALIBRATION STANDARDS
ERRORS
HUMAN FACTORS
NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS
QUALITY CONTROL