罗嵩, 张海婧, 朱英. 顶空—气相色谱法与吹扫捕集—气质联用法测定生活饮用水中三卤甲烷的方法比对[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2019, 9(5): 509-513. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2019.05.018
    引用本文: 罗嵩, 张海婧, 朱英. 顶空—气相色谱法与吹扫捕集—气质联用法测定生活饮用水中三卤甲烷的方法比对[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2019, 9(5): 509-513. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2019.05.018
    LUO Song, ZHANG Haijing, ZHU Ying. Comparison of Headspace-GC with Purge and Trap-GC/MS Methods in the Determination of Trihalomethane in Drinking Water[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2019, 9(5): 509-513. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2019.05.018
    Citation: LUO Song, ZHANG Haijing, ZHU Ying. Comparison of Headspace-GC with Purge and Trap-GC/MS Methods in the Determination of Trihalomethane in Drinking Water[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2019, 9(5): 509-513. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2019.05.018

    顶空—气相色谱法与吹扫捕集—气质联用法测定生活饮用水中三卤甲烷的方法比对

    Comparison of Headspace-GC with Purge and Trap-GC/MS Methods in the Determination of Trihalomethane in Drinking Water

    • 摘要:
      目的 探讨顶空—气相色谱法与吹扫捕集—气质联用法检测生活饮用水中三卤甲烷的一致性。
      方法 对灵敏度、精密度、准确度、线性范围等指标作比对,并对水样测定结果进行统计学t检验。
      结果 两种方法均能较好地对生活饮用水中的三卤甲烷进行定性和定量分析,测定结果无显著性差异。
      结论 顶空—气相色谱法适合浓度范围较大且样品量较多时分析,吹扫捕集—气质联用法更适用于水中痕量三卤甲烷的分析。

       

      Abstract:
      Objectives To investigate the consistency of headspace-GC and purge and trap-GC/MS method in the analysis of trihalomethane in drinking water.
      Methods The detection limit, accuracy, precision and line range were compared, and the concentrations of trihalomethane in water samples were analyzed by t-test.
      Results Two method both did well in the qualitative and quantitative analysis of trihalomethane in drinking water and there was no significant difference among the concentrations of trihalomethane in water samples.
      Conclusions Headspace- GC was suitable for analysis when the concentration range was wide and the sample amount was large. The purge-trap-GC/MS is more suitable for the analysis of trace trihalomethane in drinking water.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回