Does a successful round-robin result validate every future measurement?
No. It supports performance for the specified exercise. Your material and routine procedure still need an appropriate application assessment.
The Microtrac participation example concerned a specified ceramic-powder exercise. Its outcome should not be generalized to every material or configuration. Review preparation, dispersion and the reported distribution before interpreting agreement or differences between laboratories. A comparison study is evidence within its tested scope, not a substitute for developing your method.
Which conditions did the ceramic-powder comparison control?
In BAM’s 2021 exercise, laboratories dispersed corundum, silicon carbide and barium titanate in 3 mmol/L tetrasodium diphosphate. Prescribed probe sonication times were 5, 1 and 11 minutes respectively. Each preparation was measured five times, with six independent preparations per material.
Method details to record
| Consideration | What to record |
|---|---|
| Comparison material | Identity and preparation |
| Method alignment | Dispersion and evaluation settings |
| Assessment basis | Assigned values and study scope |
What did the laboratories compare?
BAM evaluated D10, D50 and D90 against values assigned from the participating laboratories. For silicon carbide the assigned D50 was 15.545 µm. Microtrac used SYNC instruments in three laboratories. Transfer to a new powder requires its own dispersion and optical settings.
Explore particle characterization equipment
Review the equipment details and discuss the supported configuration for your sample.