便攜式氫火焰離子化檢測器法測定固定污染源廢氣中非甲烷總烴，液化石油氣，二甲醚，甲縮醛，乙縮醛，乙醇，室內(nèi)空氣，焦爐煤氣，煉廠氣，天然氣，變壓器油，多氯聯(lián)苯，植物油，氨水

便攜式氫火焰離子化檢測器法測定固定污染源廢氣中非甲烷總烴
便攜式氫火焰離子化檢測器法測定固定污染源廢氣中非甲烷總烴 詳細信息：

名稱：預(yù)柱
固定相：高分子小球
粒度：60-80目
規(guī)格：0.8m*1/8
型號：Porapak Q
應(yīng)用：便攜式氫火焰離子化檢測器法測定固定污染源廢氣中非甲烷總烴

浩瀚色譜（山東）應(yīng)用技術(shù)開發(fā)有限公司通過實驗室和固定污染源廢氣現(xiàn)場比對測試,對便攜式氫火焰離子化檢測器法(催化氧化法和氣相色譜法)測定非甲烷總烴的檢出限,轉(zhuǎn)化效率,精密度和準確度等性能指標開展研究.實驗室測試結(jié)果表明,便攜式氫火焰離子化檢測器法測定非甲烷總烴的檢出下限(0. 3 mg/m~3),轉(zhuǎn)化效率(98. 2%),精密度(3. 49%),準確度(-2. 38%)基本滿足方法技術(shù)指標的要求,但是對于催化氧化法還需重點關(guān)注其轉(zhuǎn)化效率.固定污染源廢氣現(xiàn)場比對測試結(jié)果表明,便攜式氫火焰離子化檢測器法與實驗室方法測試結(jié)果的相對準確度(33. 2%),相對誤差(-9. 27%~23. 7%)基本能滿足測試方法的測試要求,趨勢性也保持一致,適用于現(xiàn)場測試.



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.