Sensitivity Enhancement for Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Using an Atom Concentrator Tube, the ACT 80

Significance of the Topic

The sensitivity of flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS) limits its use for trace-level metal analysis in environmental, clinical, and industrial samples. Enhancing FAAS sensitivity without resorting to more expensive or complex atomization techniques can improve detection limits, reduce sample preparation burdens, and extend the applicability of routine flame methods.

Study Objectives and Overview

This application note describes the development and evaluation of the ACT‐80 atom concentrator tube, a simple quartz accessory designed to increase atom residence time in the optical path of an air–acetylene flame. The study reviews previous enhancements in FAAS, outlines the ACT-80 design and installation, and reports comparative performance data for key elements.

Methodology and Instrumentation

A benchmark SpectrAA-300/400 FAAS system with Mark VI spraychamber and Mark VA/VI air–acetylene burner was used. The ACT-80 tube (150 mm long with two lengthwise slots) was mounted in the VGA 76 cell holder. Standard aqueous solutions (BDH Spectrosol, acidified to 0.5% HNO3) were introduced at 6 mL/min. Flame optimization ensured a lean to stoichiometric composition. Absorbance signals were recorded after a 20 s delay and integrated over 10 s, with and without the ACT-80.

Results and Discussion

Characteristic concentration and detection limit measurements for Ag, Au, Bi, Cd, Cu, Hg, Mn, Pb, Sb, Se, Te, and Tl demonstrate 2×–3× sensitivity gains with the ACT-80. For example, lead’s characteristic concentration improved from ~0.12 mg/L to ~0.04 mg/L. Calibration slopes increased accordingly, and blanks remained stable. Practical tests on US EPA quality control waters and NBS SRM 1643b confirmed accurate quantification of Cd, Cu, and Pb at or below standard flame detection limits.

Benefits and Practical Applications

• 2–3× lower detection limits for many metals using standard air–acetylene FAAS
• No major changes to existing hardware—simple tube installation
• High sample throughput (~200 samples/hour) with minimal memory effects for suitable element classes
• Improved quantification in environmental QA/QC and trace analysis without graphite furnace or hydride generation

Utilized Instrumentation

• SpectrAA-300/400 atomic absorption spectrometers
• Mark VI spraychamber, Mark VA/VI air–acetylene burners
• VGA 76 cell holder and ACT-80 atom concentrator tube

Future Trends and Applications

Further work may explore refractory materials for use with nitrous oxide–acetylene flames, optimize tube geometry, and integrate automated sample preconcentration. Coupling atom concentrator tubes with cooled traps or electrostatic precipitation could yield additional gains, broadening FAAS utility for ultratrace determination.

Conclusion

The ACT-80 atom concentrator tube offers a cost-effective, straightforward enhancement to flame AAS, delivering consistent 2–3× sensitivity improvements and lowering detection limits across multiple metals. Its ease of use and compatibility with existing instruments make it valuable for routine trace metal analysis.

Reference

1. Bennett PA, Rothery E. Introducing Atomic Absorption Analysis. Varian Techtron; 1983.
2. Bernhard AE. Spectroscopy. 1987;2(6):24.
3. Hess KR, Marcus RK. Spectroscopy. 1987;2(9):27.
4. Annual Reports on Analytical Atomic Spectroscopy. RSC; Vols 1–14.
5. Sturman BT. J Anal Atom Spectrom. 1986;1:55.
6. Knowles M. Varian Instruments At Work. 1988;AA-80.
7. Willis JB, Frary BD, Sturman BT. in press.
8. Hell A, Ulrich WF, Shifrin N, Ramirez-Munez J. Appl Opt. 1968;7:1317.
9. Hell A. 5th Australian Spectroscopy Conference; 1965.
10. Michalik PA, Stephens R. Talanta. 1981;28:37.
11. Michalik PA, Stephens R. Talanta. 1981;28:43.
12. Michalik PA, Stephens R. Talanta. 1982;29:443.
13. Willis JB. Spectrochim Acta. 1970;25B:487.
14. L’vov BV, et al. Spectrochim Acta. 1976;31B:49.
15. Robinson JW. Anal Chim Acta. 1962;27:465.
16. Watling RJ. Anal Chim Acta. 1977;94:181.
17. Watling RJ. Anal Chim Acta. 1978;97:395.
18. Taylor A, Brown AA. Analyst. 1983;108:1159.
19. Brown AA, Taylor A. Analyst. 1984;109:1455.
20. Brown AA, Milner BA, Taylor A. Analyst. 1985;110:501.
21. Delves DT. Analyst. 1970;95:431.
22. Lau CM, et al. Can J Spectrosc. 1976;21:100.
23. Khalighie J, Ure AM, West TS. Anal Chim Acta. 1979;107:191.
24. Khalighie J, Ure AM, West TS. Anal Chim Acta. 1980;117:257.
25. Khalighie J, Ure AM, West TS. Anal Chim Acta. 1981;131:27.
26. Khalighie J, Ure AM, West TS. Anal Chim Acta. 1982;134:271.
27. Khalighie J, Ure AM, West TS. Anal Chim Acta. 1982;141:213.
28. Lau CM, Ure AM, West TS. Anal Chim Acta. 1983;146:171.
29. Lau CM, Ure AM, West TS. Anal Proc. 1983;20:114.
30. Hallam C, Thompson KC. Analyst. 1985;110:497.
31. Bradshaw S, Gascoigne AJ, Headridge JB, Moffett JH. Anal Chim Acta. 1987;197:323.
32. Kahl M, Mitchell DG, Kaufman GL, Aldous KM. Anal Chim Acta. 1976;87:215.