产品名称：	PQ预柱 便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法测定固定污染源废气中非甲烷总烃
产品型号：	PQ预柱
品牌：	1941
产品数量：
产品单价：	面议
日期:	2022-02-23

PQ预柱 便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法测定固定污染源废气中非甲烷总烃的详细资料

便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法测定固定污染源废气中非甲烷总烃
便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法测定固定污染源废气中非甲烷总烃 详细信息：

名称：预柱
固定相：高分子小球
粒度：60-80目
规格：0.8m*1/8
型号：Porapak Q
应用：便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法测定固定污染源废气中非甲烷总烃

浩瀚色谱（山东）应用技术开发有限公司通过实验室和固定污染源废气现场比对测试,对便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法(催化氧化法和气相色谱法)测定非甲烷总烃的检出限,转化效率,精密度和准确度等性能指标开展研究.实验室测试结果表明,便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法测定非甲烷总烃的检出下限(0. 3 mg/m~3),转化效率(98. 2%),精密度(3. 49%),准确度(-2. 38%)基本满足方法技术指标的要求,但是对于催化氧化法还需重点关注其转化效率.固定污染源废气现场比对测试结果表明,便携式氢火焰离子化检测器法与实验室方法测试结果的相对准确度(33. 2%),相对误差(-9. 27%~23. 7%)基本能满足测试方法的测试要求,趋势性也保持一致,适用于现场测试.



Determination of non-methane total hydrocarbons in waste gas from stationary pollution sources by portable hydrogen flame ionization detector
Determination of non-methane total hydrocarbons in waste gas from stationary pollution sources by portable hydrogen flame ionization detector

Name: Pre-column
Stationary phase: polymer beads
Granularity: 60-80 mesh
Specifications: 0.8m*1/8
Model: Porapak Q
Application: Determination of non-methane total hydrocarbons in waste gas from stationary pollution sources by portable hydrogen flame ionization detector

Haohan Chromatography (Shandong) Application Technology Development Co., Ltd. has determined the detection limits of non-methane total hydrocarbons by the portable hydrogen flame ionization detector method (catalytic oxidation method and gas chromatography) through laboratory and stationary pollution source waste gas field comparison tests. The performance indicators such as conversion efficiency, precision and accuracy were studied. The laboratory test results showed that the detection limit of the portable hydrogen flame ionization detector method for the determination of non-methane total hydrocarbons (0. 3 mg/m~3), the conversion efficiency (98. 2%), precision (3. 49%), and accuracy (-2. 38%) basically meet the requirements of the method technical indicators, but for the catalytic oxidation method, it is necessary to focus on its conversion efficiency. Fixed pollution source waste gas site The comparative test results show that the relative accuracy (33. 2%) and relative error (-9. 27%~23. 7%) of the portable hydrogen flame ionization detector method and the laboratory method can basically meet the test method. The test requirements and trends are also consistent, which is suitable for field tests.