270 likes | 632 Views
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
E N D
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 2. Large sample volume and long purging time (10~30 min)
Experimental Aim To construct an automated ST-GC system for on-line determination of dissolved VOCs in water.
Micro-sorbent Trap Carboxen 1000 Carboxen 1003 1/16”
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
Recoveries of ST methods Recovery =
Species Chromatograms of ST-GC-ECD • CHCl3 • CCl4 • CH2Br2 • CHCl=CCl2 • CHBrCl2 • CCl2=CCl2
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.