橡胶防老剂RD不同分析方法的比较  

Comparison of different analytical methods of rubber antioxidant RD

作　　者：刘郁[1,2] 刘连新[2] 高庆宇[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国矿业大学化工学院,徐州221008 [2]徐州工业职业技术学院,徐州221140

出　　处：《化工新型材料》2012年第8期141-143,共3页New Chemical Materials

摘　　要：为比较橡胶防老剂RD(TMQ 2,2,4-三甲基-1,2-二氢化喹啉聚合体(C12H15N)n(n=2～4))高效液相色溶剂梯度洗脱的方法和GC-Ms高温裂解方法测定聚合物的含量,采用高效液相色谱法,以水-甲醇作为流动相,检测波长254nm,流速为1mL/min,C18 4.6mm×150mm/5μm色谱柱;GC-Ms法的热分解温度590℃,分解时间6s,热分解室温度为320℃,注射温度250℃,色谱柱DB-1 30mm×0.32mm×0.25μm,升温速度10℃/min,终温为120℃。载气N2流速为1mL/min,FID检测温度280℃,H2流速为30mL/min,空气流速为300mL/min;面积归一法计算含量。结果表明,高效液相色谱法比气相色谱法稳定、可靠,高效液相色谱法测定橡胶防老剂RD的含量优于气相色谱法。Comparison of HPLC solvent gradient elution method and GC-Ms polymer pyrolysis method for determination of content of rubber antioxidant RD（TMQ 2,2,4-trJmethyl-l,2-dihydro quinoline polymer（C12H15N）n. N=2-4）. Method：high performance liquid chromatography using water-methanol as the mobile phase, detection wavelength 254nm, flow rate lmL/min, using C18 4. 6mm X 150mm/5Bm column; GC-Ms methods using thermal decomposition temperature 590℃,decomposition time 6s, heat decomposition room temperature 320℃, injection temperature 250℃, column DB-1 30ram × 0. 32mnl × 0. 25μm,heating rate 10℃/rain,final temperature of 120℃. N2 carrier gas flow rate was lmL/min, FID detection temperature 280℃, H2 flow rate of 30mL/min, air flow rate of 300mL/miru Content area normalization method. Results：the results showed that high performance liquid chromatography than gas chromatography stable and reliable. Conclusion： determination of the content of rubber antioxidant RD was better than gas chromatography.

关 键 词：橡胶防老剂 RD 高效液相 溶剂梯度洗脱 

分 类 号：TQ330.382[化学工程—橡胶工业]