Analytical Methods Committee

The technical committee of the Analytical Science Community

Analytical Methods Committee Expert Working Groups Presentations Software Technical Briefs

About us

The Analytical Methods Committee (AMC) is a committee of the Royal Society of Chemistry Analytical Science Community that is made up of Expert Working Groups (EWGs) and designated representatives. Our broad aim is to participate in national and international efforts to establish a comprehensive framework for appropriate quality in chemical measurement.

The AMC:

Coordinates the activities of Expert Working Groups concerned with various aspects of analytical measurement.
Assists with the development and establishment of suitable performance criteria for analytical methods and instrumentation.
Advises on the use and development of appropriate analytical methods.
Works alongside accreditation services and governing bodies, such as DEFRA, the FSA and UKAS, to ensure best analytical practice.
Produces reports and Technical Briefs on a wide range of analytical topics. Technical Briefs are published in the RSC journal Analytical Methods.
Supports continuing professional development (CPD) through the publication of reports, Technical Briefs and other outputs, which can be used towards CPD certification.

Read more about reaching the milestone 100th AMC Technical Brief.

To keep up to date with AMC activities, please follow us on Twitter at @RSC_AMC.

Key Information

Below are committee details and information relating to the Analytical Methods Committee.

Composition and Terms of Office

Chair (appointed by ASC Council) - appointment is for three years and renewable for a further three years.
Secretary (part-time) - appointed by ASC Council and Analytical Methods Trust.
Two members appointed by the ASC Council - expected to be one from the Analytical Science Network, and one to be the ASC President or a representative. Expected to serve for three years on rotation.
Chairs of AMC Expert Working Groups* (see footnote).
Representatives from other bodies as agreed with ASC Council, currently APA, BEIS, BSI, DEFRA (EA), Eurachem UK, FSA, HSE, LGC, NPL, UKAS and the water and clinical chemistry sectors - invitation to body renewed every three years.
Editor of AMC Technical Briefs.
Publicity Officer.
Not more than three co-opted members - as required by the Chair, normally serving for one year only.
Chair of the Analytical Methods Trust.

* Currently Animal Feedingstuffs, Essential Oils, Food and Feed Authenticity, Heritage Science, Instrumental Analysis, Sampling Uncertainty and Sampling Quality, and Statistics Expert Working Groups.

Glossary

APA - Association of Public Analysts.

ASC - Analytical Science Community.

BSI - British Standards Institute.

DBT (OPSS) - Department for Business and Trade (Office for Product Safety and Standards)

DEFRA (EA) - Department of Food and Rural Affairs (Environment Agency).

FSA - Food Standards Agency.

HSE - Health and Safety Executive.

LGC - Laboratory of the Government Chemist.

NPL - National Physical Laboratory.

UKAS - United Kingdom Accreditation Service.

Membership of the Analytical Methods Committee

The committee comprises representatives from consultants, academia, government, industry and public analysts. Membership as of 12 February 2025:

Dr Christopher Waldron, Chair
Dr Zoë Ayres, Analytical Community Council President
Ms Fran Bilby, UKAS Representative
Dr Richard Brown, NPL Representative
Dr David Bullock, UK NEQAS, representing the Clinical sector
Dr Lucia Burgio, Chair of the Heritage Science Expert Working Group
Mrs Judith Egan-Shuttler, Technical Briefs Editor
Dr Steve Ellison, LGC Representative
Ms Carol Gibbons, Association of Public Analysts Representative
Dr Chris Harrington, RSC Eurachem representative
Dr Anne Horan, RSC staff member for Analytical Community
Mr Chris Hunt, Association of Public Analysts Representative
Dr Zaid Meherali, OPSS Representative
Professor Jim Miller, Chair of the Analytical Methods Trust
Mr Neil Owen, Chair of the Essential Oils EWG
Mrs Bhavna Parmar, FSA Representative
Mr Ian Pengelly, Health and Safety Laboratory Representative
Professor Mike Ramsey, Chair of the Sampling Uncertainty Expert Working Group
Mr Matthew Rawlinson, Affinity Water, representing the water sector
Dr Mike Sargent, Chair of the Instrumental Analysis Expert Working Group
Dr Michael Walker, Chair of the Food and Feed Authenticity Expert Working Group
Professor John R. Dean, Secretary

Analytical Methods Expert Working Groups

Most of the Expert Working Groups are orientated towards a specific topic area. Much of the financial support for them has been provided by government bodies, particularly the Food Standards Agency and the NMO.

View our Expert Working Groups

Resources produced by the AMC for the analytical chemistry community

Published outputs of the AMC come in a variety of forms including reports, Technical Briefs, published papers, software, and datasets.

The outputs of the AMC are provided as a service by the Analytical Science Community of the RSC. All outputs of the AMC are subjected to a thorough process of scrutiny before approval for publication, first by an Expert Working Group of the AMC and then by the full AMC.

The AMC supports continuing professional development through the publication of reports, technical briefs and other outputs, which can be used towards CPD certification.

AMC Technical Briefs

AMC Technical Briefs provide reliable and up-to-date technical information about aspects of analytical science for members of the RSC Analytical Science Community and the wider analytical community. Areas covered by AMC Technical Briefs mainly reflect the activities of the various AMC Expert Working Groups and concentrate on items that are important for analytical scientists, currently topical, or not readily available from other sources.

View all Technical Briefs

AMC Software

This free of charge software is provided on an "as is" basis. The Royal Society of Chemistry disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to this software, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

In no event shall the Royal Society of Chemistry be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, consequential damages whatsoever including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profits, arising out of or in any way connected with the use of performance of this software and related graphics obtained through this web site.

In no event shall the Royal Society of Chemistry be liable for any damage to your computer equipment or software which may occur on account of your downloading this software from the site, decompiling, reverse engineering, disassembling or otherwise reducing to human readable form any software, whether caused by a virus, bug or otherwise.

View available software

AMC Reports

AMC Reports present detailed studies of various aspects and applications of the analytical sciences.

They are produced by the expert Subcommittees of the AMC, and then subjected to an independent scrutiny by the whole AMC before publication. Some are published in one of several specialist journals and, after an interval, reproduced here, while others are deposited here in the first instance.

AMC Reports may be freely reproduced and distributed in exactly the same form as published here, in print or electronic media, without formal permission from the Royal Society of Chemistry. Copies must not be offered for sale and the copyright notice must not be removed or obscured in any way. Any other reuse of these documents, in whole or in part, requires permission in advance from the RSC.

Reports of the Instrumental Criteria Subcommittee

Historical list of AMC Reports

Part I (1984 Revised 1998): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Atomic absorption Spectrophotometers, Primarily for use with Flames

Part II (1985 Revised 1998): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Atomic absorption Spectrophotometers, Primarily for use with Electrothermal Atomisers

Part III (1986): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Polychromators for use in Emission Spectrometry with ICP Sources

Part IV (1987): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Monochromators for use in Emission Spectrometry with ICP Sources

Part V (1987): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Inductively Coupled Plasma Sources for use in Emission Spectrometry

Part VI (1990): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Wavelength Dispersive X-ray Spectrometers.

Part VII (1991): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Simultaneous Wavelength Dispersive X-ray Spectrometers

Part VIII (1993): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Gas-Liquid Chromatography

Part IX (1997): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Instrumentation for High-performance Liquid Chromatography

Part X (1997): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spec¬trometry

Part XI (1998): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Molecular Fluorescence Spectrometry

Part XII (2000): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Capillary Electrophoresis

Part XIII (2000): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Instrumentation for UV-VIS-NIR Spectrometry

Part XIV (2000): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometry

Part XV (2001): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Gas Chromatography-Ion-Trap Mass Spectrometry

Part XVI (2006): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Evaluation of General User NMR Spectrometers

Part XVII (2005): Evaluation of analytical instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectrometers

Part XVIII (2005): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Differential Scanning Calorimetry.

Part XIX (2006): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

CHNS Elemental Analysers.

Part XX (2006): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Instrumentation for energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry.

Part XXII (2007): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Instrumentation for liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry.

Part XXIII (2008): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Instrumentation for portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometry.

Part XXIV (2010): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Instrumentation for quadrupole inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry.

Part XXV (2015): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Differential Scanning Calorimetry.

Part XXVI (2015): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

Instrumentation for Voltammetry.

Part XXVII (2018): Evaluation of Analytical Instrumentation:

A guide to good practice in the purchase of analytical instrumentation.

AMC Presentations

These presentation are available for free download for private study. The presentations have been donated by the authors, free of charge, usually having been shown at a conference. Those wishing to re-show the presentations, in whole or in part, must first seek the consent of, and give full acknowledgement to, the original authors.

While the material is broadly consistent with the aims and intentions of the AMC, the presentations have not been formally approved by the AMC. The views expressed are the authors’ own and do not necessarily represent those of the AMC in every respect.

View AMC Presentations

AMC Guides

Sampling Uncertainty 2019

Guide to achieving reliable quantitative LC-MS measurements 2013

Best Practice Guide for Generating Mass Spectra 2006

Methodology for Accurate Mass Measurement of small molecules 2004

AMC Datasets

AMC Datasets comprise a growing collection of data likely to be of use to analytical scientists involved in the teaching, learning, or studying of statistical and chemometrics methods and in testing computer software. A dataset could, for instance, be used by a teacher to illustrate a statistical method applied to a particular analytical activity, by a student to try out alternative methods or different statistical packages, or by a research worker to act as an example with known characteristics for the development of new and improved methods.

AMC Datasets are presented as text files, for ease of opening in a wide range of application packages. They have embedded descriptions of the type and source of the data. At present the datasets are simply listed, as below but, as the collection grows, AMC will provide a search facility so that particular types of data can be rapidly identified.

Datasets are described either as ‘Experimental’ or ‘Simulated’. Experimental datasets are as observed by the original author. Simulated datasets represent real situations but have been modified or disguised in some way to preserve the anonymity of the source or other aspects of the data.

These datasets may be freely downloaded and used. Any new results obtained from the study of the datasets may be published freely, but the data themselves must not be republished without the consent of the original author.

Downloadable Files

1. Aflatoxin M1

Calibration data for aflatoxin M1, with four repeat response measurements at each of six concentrations

2. AFM1-proficiency

Proficiency test data from the determination of aflatoxin M1 in milk in 91 laboratories, with corresponding information about the analytical method used and accreditation status

3. AGRG-IQC

Internal quality control data, derived from the determination of 25 elements in a control material, in 158 successive runs of analysis with varying numbers (between 2 and 8) of repeat determinations in each run

4. CO2 methods

Method validation / comparison data. Repeat results for the determination of carbon dioxide in sodium carbonate by five variant titrimetric methods and one gravimetric method

5. Flint provenance

Pattern recognition data. 16 trace elements determined in 186 pieces of flint collected at 11 different locations

6. GemmaGMO

Proficiency testing data. Genetically modified soya. Results from 36 laboratories in 22 different materials (rounds of the test), with some missing data

7. Lambeth Soils

Orientation survey data. Cu, Pb, Zn, and Cd determined in soil from 16 parks in Lambeth. Duplicated sampling and analysis in a balanced design

8. Plutonium239

Calibration data. Plutonium determined by ICP-MS, with triplicated responses at 8 concentrations

9. Tin in tomato paste

Proficiency test data. Results for tin in a tomato paste test material determined by 46 participant laboratories

10. Uranium in stream water

Method validation data. Uranium in water from 16 different streams determined by a field method and a reference method

11. Homogeneity test for Ochratoxin in Cereal

Ten random samples of cereal analysed for ochratoxin

12. Homogeneity test for types of fat in mixed fat spread

Ten random samples of mixed fat spread analysed for saturated, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids

13. Homogeneity test for proximate analytes in canned meat

Ten random samples of canned meat analysed for moisture, ash, fat, nitrogen and hydroxyproline

14. Homogeneity test for nitrate and nitrite in sausage

Ten random samples of sausage analysed for nitrate and nitrite

15. Homogeneity test for maleic hydrazine in onion puree

Ten random samples of onion puree analysed for maleic hydrazine

16. Homogeneity test for analytes in rock samples

Ten rock samples analysed for various analytes

17. Homogeneity test for analytes in rock samples (2)

Ten rock samples analysed for various analytes

18. Homogeneity test for analytes in rock samples (3)

Ten rock samples analysed for various analytes

19. Homogeneity test for 1,3-DCP and 3-MCDP in soy sauce

Ten random samples of soy sauce analysed for 1,3-DCP and 3-MCDP

20. Homogeneity test for proximate analytes in tonic water

Ten random samples of tonic water analysed for Acesulfame-K, Aspartame, Benzoic acid and Quinine

21. Field trial of instruments

8 Colocated instruments measuring the same aspect of air pollution over a 44 day period

22. Mode hunting

Data from proficiency tests, used in published demonstration of mode-hunting with the EM algorithm

23. Repeatability duplicate data - alcohol in breath

31,874 duplicate measurements of ethanol in breath taken for law enforcement purposes

24. Dissolved Oxygen: method comparison

Replicated analysis of 33 different samples of water for dissolved oxygen by the standard Winkler method and by a modified method

25. Collaborative Trial Results

Results of precision characteristics from published collaborative trials.

Submission Process

Procedures for Submission and Approval of AMC Reports

Technical Briefs, Recommendations, Background Papers, and Software

A Submission to the AMC

The delegated AMC subcommittee or ad hoc group ("subcommittee") is responsible for submitting drafts of Reports, Technical Briefs, Recommendations, Background Papers, and Software ("documents") for approval by the AMC.
Drafts of documents for submission must be distributed to all members of the subcommittee. A deadline for response of at least 14 days shall normally be allowed. Default responses will be taken as consent to submit. The chair of the subcommittee will act upon the responses.
If there are only editorial-type problems identified in a draft, the subcommittee chair or delegated person will change them as appropriate and submit the edited document to the AMC, with copies to the subcommittee members.
If there are substantive objections raised by members of the subcommittee, the matter must be resolved to the satisfaction of the subcommittee before the document is submitted.
The subcommittee shall minute the date and outcome of all such distributions.
Because of the special format of Technical Briefs, the editor of Technical Briefs will prepare the submitted document, but the final decision to submit to the AMC rests with the delegated subcommittee or ad hoc group.

B Approval by the AMC

Documents will normally be considered by the "fast track" procedure. Submitted documents must be promptly distributed to all members of the AMC. A deadline for response of at least 14 days shall normally be allowed. Default responses will be taken as consent to submit. The chair of the AMC will act according to the responses.
If members of the AMC find that the document is satisfactory as it stands, it is immediately regarded as "approved".
If members of the AMC identify only minor problems in the document, such problems should be referred to the chair of the drafting subcommittee or delegated person, and amended to the satisfaction of the chair of the AMC. The amended document is then regarded as "approved".
Documents failing to receive approval by the fast track procedure shall be referred for discussion at the next meeting of the AMC.
Approved documents can be placed in the AMC web site, distributed as hard copy, or submitted to a journal, as appropriate.
Approval of AMC Software is restricted to a decision on whether the application is within the aims and intentions of the AMC.
All decisions on submitted documents must be minuted with dates by the AMC. Documents will be published in the name of the AMC. Reports will normally carry a preamble naming the members of the subcommittee who approved the submission of the report. Where it is felt appropriate, the document may also contain an attribution to individuals in the form "This report was drafted on behalf of the AMC by…". Technical Briefs etc. will not carry such a preamble but may, where appropriate, contain the attribution.

Unsolicited Submissions

Procedure for handling unsolicited submissions for AMC

Technical Briefs, Recommendations, Background Papers, Software or Technical Reports

AMC Technical Briefs, Recommendations, Background Papers, Software and Technical Reports are usually the result of studies undertaken by the AMC's subcommittees. Unsolicited submissions from other sources are occasionally received and a procedure for handling them is required.
Broadly speaking, unsolicited submissions must meet the same criteria as those applied to material generated internally in the AMC. The submission would have to be adopted by an AMC Subcommittee, and there must be a positive reason to accept it. In particular, the AMC website must not be regarded as an alternative general medium for analytical science papers, or a repository for otherwise unpublishable material.

To be accepted by the AMC, unsolicited material must therefore:

be compatible with the aims and intentions of the AMC and tend to enhance its reputation
deal expertly with a matter of wide technical interest or utility to analytical scientists
receive scrutiny and approval from an expert group (usually a subcommittee), and then approval from the whole AMC

The following procedure will normally be adopted.

On receipt of an unsolicited item, the AMC Secretariat will inform the author(s) of the conditions of acceptance, based on the following. In particular, the author(s) must i. demonstrate that there is no danger of copyright infringement and ii. be willing to surrender all rights to the work to the AMC.
The Secretariat will distribute the title and a brief abstract to all members of the AMC. Members of the AMC will promptly consider whether the material is likely to be appropriate.
If there is a broad agreement to proceed, the Chairman will allocate the item to a subcommittee or an ad hoc group for expert consideration. The AMC will subsequently act upon the advice so provided.
If there is initially only marginal support from AMC members to proceed with the submission, the matter could be reconsidered after further discussion.
The subcommittee or ad hoc group dealing with the item may make substantial changes before acceptance.
The subcommittee or ad hoc group will advise the AMC on whether the final version should carry an attribution to the author(s). This will normally happen when the amended submission is still mostly the work of the author. However the consent of the author(s) is required.

L S Theobald Award

Celebrating excellence in Analytical Science

Please note, the closing date for nominations is Friday 1 August 2025

The 'L S Theobald Award' is made in memory of Leslie Stuart Theobald (1898-1979) who was a Lecturer/Reader in Analytical Chemistry at Imperial College from 1925 until his retirement in 1963.

Nominations for the award are invited annually.

The award is made to someone who has significantly contributed to developing or applying analytical chemistry/analytical science.

The Analytical Methods Trust (AMT) provides an honorarium of £1000, a certificate and covers reasonable expenses incurred in presenting the award lecture.

Eligibility

The award is open to all academic, public service and industrial scientists resident in the UK or the Republic of Ireland. It is not a requirement that the recipient should be a member of the RSC or have contributed directly to the work of the Analytical Methods Committee (AMC) or its Expert Working Groups. Trustees of the AMT are not eligible for nomination.

Examples of contributions to analytical science relevant to the award include (but are not limited to): the development of methods of analysis and/or sampling relevant to ensuring human and environment health, the application of novel or existing analytical methods to new fields, significant improvement to methods in routine use, procedures that validate and evaluate analytical methods, the quality of analytical results and contributions towards international collaborations.

Career breaks will be taken into consideration, and nominations are encouraged for those whose career has spanned a break due to caring responsibilities or personal circumstances e.g. a period of parental/adoption leave, family commitments, illness, or other exceptional circumstances.

When nominating previous RSC prize winners, please remember that a person cannot be awarded twice for substantially the same body of work.

Nominations Procedure

Nomination procedure for the L S Theobald Lectureship

Candidates are not permitted to nominate themselves. Trustees of the Analytical Methods Trust are not eligible for nomination.

Nominations must include:

A one-page CV for the nominee which should include a summary of the nominees education, career publications (including total numbers of publications and patents) and the name of an independent referee.
A one-page supporting statement identifying the nominee’s contribution to analytical chemistry/analytical science.

Nominations should be submitted via email to Ian Lumley, Secretary of the Analytical Methods Trust.

Selection committee

The Analytical Methods Trust (AMT), or a sub-committee appointed by the AMT to make a recommendation, will make the final decision on the award. No person associated with a nomination will be permitted to participate in the consideration or decision-making process for the award.

Presentation of the Theobald Award Lecture

Presentation of the Theobald Award lecture

The recipient of the LS Theobald Award is normally required to present an award lecture, usually in association with a meeting of the Royal Society of Chemistry Analytical Methods Committee or of the RSC Analytical Science Community’s Groups and Regions.

Previous Winners

Previous winners and their Theobald Lectures, where available.

2022 - P Potts
2021 - T Fearn
2019 - L Burgio
2016 - R Brown
2014 - S Hill
2012 - M Ramsey
2010 - M Sargent
2008 - S L R Ellison
2006 - M Thompson
2005 - M J Milchard
2004 - R Wood
2003 - C Burgess
2002 - I M McRobbie
2000 - J D R Thomas
1998 - D C M Squirrell
1996 - B J Birch
1995 - P G W Cobb
1991 - J A W Dalziel
1987 - R A Chalmers
1985 - E Bishop

Downloadable Files

Certifying geological reference materials using GeoPT proficiency testing

Analytical Methods Committee

About us

Key Information

Resources produced by the AMC for the analytical chemistry community

AMC Software

AMC Reports

Reports of the Instrumental Criteria Subcommittee

AMC Presentations

AMC Guides

AMC Datasets

Downloadable Files

Procedures for Submission and Approval of AMC Reports

Procedure for handling unsolicited submissions for AMC

Related Links

L S Theobald Award

Celebrating excellence in Analytical Science

Eligibility

Nomination procedure for the L S Theobald Lectureship

Selection committee

Presentation of the Theobald Award lecture

Previous Winners

Downloadable Files

2022 - Phil Potts, Open University

2018 - Lucia Burgio, Victoria and Albert Museum

2016 - Richard Brown, NPL

2014 – Steve Hill, University of Plymouth

2012 - Michael Ramsey, University of Sussex

2010 - Mike Sargent, LGC

2008 - Steve Ellison, LGC Ltd, UK

2006 - Michael Thompson, Birkbeck College

2005 - Michael Milchard

2004 - Roger Wood, Food Standards Agency

2003 - Chris Burgess, Burgess Consultancy