节点文献

工作场所空气中氯乙烯用FID与ECD气相色谱测定方法的比较研究

Research and comparison of determining chloroethylene in air of workplace by gas chromatography,ECD and FID

  • 推荐 CAJ下载
  • PDF下载
  • 不支持迅雷等下载工具,请取消加速工具后下载。

【作者】 李颜岩史立新郭宏翟城李刚

【Author】 LI Yan-yan~1,SHI Li-xin~1,GUO Hong~1,ZHAI Cheng~2,LI Gang~1 (1.Liaoning Institute of Occupational Health,Shenyang 110005,China;2.China Medical University,Shenyang 110005,China)

【机构】 辽宁省职业病防治院中国医科大学

【摘要】 目的:比较工作场所空气中氯乙烯采用FID与ECD气相色谱测定方法的技术参数。方法:氯乙烯分别采用直接进样或用活性炭管采集,热解吸进样,经DNP色谱柱分离,分别采用FID、ECD进行检测,比较技术指标。结果:FID测定氯乙烯在4.9×10-4~2.0μg/ml范围内线性关系良好,r=0.9996,检出限为4.9×10-4μg/ml;ECD测定氯乙烯在4.4×10-5~2.0μg/ml范围内线性关系良好,r=0.9998,检出限为4.4×1O-5μg/ml。结论:采用ECD气相色谱测定空气中的氯乙烯优于FID,且对于含量较低需直接进样的氯乙烯测定更具优势。

【Abstract】 Objective:To compare the results of determining chloroethylene in air of workplace by gas chromatography with FID and ECD.Methods:Chloroethylene in air was either directly detected or was detected in the way of thermal desorption after being adsorbed by charcoal tube sampling,then it was analyzed by gas chromatography with FID(or ECD) determination with DNP capillary column and the result was compared.Results:FID was good to determine chloroethylene when the concentration of chloroethylene was between 4.9×10-4~2.0μg/ml,r=0.9996,the detection limit was 4.9×10-4μg/ml.However,ECD was better to determine chloroethylene than FID when the concentration of chloroethylene was between 4.4×10-5~2.0μg/ml,r= 0.9998,the detection limit was 4.4×10-5μg/ml.Conclusion:ECD is better to determine chloroethylene than FID,especially when there is lower content and direct detection.

【关键词】 氯乙烯气相色谱ECDFID
【Key words】 ChloroethyleneGas chromatographyECDFID
【基金】 卫生部科学基金资助项目(2005DE101439)
  • 【会议录名称】 2009年卫生检验新技术学术研讨会会刊
  • 【会议名称】2009年卫生检验新技术学术研讨会
  • 【会议时间】2009-10-21
  • 【会议地点】中国河南开封
  • 【分类号】R134
  • 【主办单位】中国卫生检验杂志社、河南省预防医学会卫生检验专业委员会、河北省预防医学会理化检验专业委员会
节点文献中: 

本文链接的文献网络图示:

本文的引文网络