1 / 26

Static Headspace (HS) Dynamic Headspace Spray-and-Trap (ST) SPME Membrane Inlet

Extraction Methods. Static Headspace (HS) Dynamic Headspace Spray-and-Trap (ST) SPME Membrane Inlet. Purge-and-Trap. Purge-and-Trap Method. Advantage : More sensitive than HS. Drawback : 1. Foaming and slowness of the purging step

tovah
Télécharger la présentation

Static Headspace (HS) Dynamic Headspace Spray-and-Trap (ST) SPME Membrane Inlet

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Extraction Methods • Static Headspace (HS) • Dynamic Headspace • Spray-and-Trap (ST) • SPME • Membrane Inlet Purge-and-Trap

  2. Purge-and-Trap Method Advantage : More sensitive than HS Drawback : 1. Foaming and slowness of the purging step 2. Large sample volume and long purging time (10~30 min)

  3. Experimental Aim To construct an automated ST-GC system for on-line determination of dissolved VOCs in water.

  4. Micro-sorbent Trap Carboxen 1000 Carboxen 1003 1/16”

  5. Spray-and-Trap Device

  6. Cleaning

  7. Sampling

  8. Mode A

  9. Mode B

  10. Injection

  11. Sensitivity of Mode A Sensitivity of Mode A 1. Sprying condition A. Size of droplet 2. Amount of sample B. Extraction gas flow rate C. Design of nozzle 3. Amount of extraction gas that is sampled. D. Introducing a limited amount of sample and extraction gas

  12. Mode A VS. Mode B A

  13. Purge-and-Trap Device

  14. Analytical conditions for ST and PT

  15. Recoveries of ST methods Recovery =

  16. DL, R.S.D, and R2 for BTEX

  17. Species Chromatograms of ST-GC-ECD • CHCl3 • CCl4 • CH2Br2 • CHCl=CCl2 • CHBrCl2 • CCl2=CCl2

  18. Conclusion • An automated spray-and-trap device • was built in the laboratory. • The studied ST method was validated • in comparison with classic PT: recoveries • precision, and linearity. • The ST method shows a fast response to • abrupt changes in sample quality, which • makes it suitable for on-site monitoring • of a water body.

More Related