GC-FPD与GC-FID用于测定工作场所空气中乙硫醇的方法比较  

Comparison of GC- FPD and GC- FID in determining ethanethiol in air of workplace

作　　者：李颜岩 史立新[1] 

机构地区：[1]辽宁省职业病防治院,辽宁沈阳110005

出　　处：《中国卫生检验杂志》2013年第16期3190-3191,3228,共3页Chinese Journal of Health Laboratory Technology

摘　　要：目的比较工作场所空气中乙硫醇采用FPD(火焰光度检测器)与FID(氢焰离子化检测器)气相色谱测定的方法。方法空气中以分子或蒸汽态存在的乙硫醇用浸渍玻璃纤维滤纸采集,经洗脱与提取后进样,弱极性色谱柱分离,分别采用FPD、FID进行检测,比较方法学技术指标。结果 FID测定乙硫醇在0.2μg/ml～8.4μg/ml范围内线性关系良好,r=0.9999,检出限为0.2μg/ml,与FPD的测定结果基本相当。结论采用GC-FID测定空气中的乙硫醇的技术参数与用GC-FPD基本等效;GC-FID较为常见,使用与推广更具有实际意义。Objective To compare the determination results of ethanethiol in air of workplace by GC - FPD （flame photometric detector） and GC - FID （flame ionization detector）. Methods The ethanethiols in air existed as molecules or vapor state were measured by GC - FID and GC - FPD respectively after collection with a impregnated glass fiber filter paper, elution, extrac- tion, injection and separation on weak polar column, then the relative technical indicators were compared. Results The deter mination results of GC - FID indicated that the linear relationship was good in the range of 0.2 μg/ml - 8.4 μg/ml, r = 0. 9999, and the detection limit was 0.2 μg/ml, which was roughly equal to those of GC - FPD. Conclusion The technical parameters of ethanethiol determination in the workplace air were essentially equivalent by GC - FID and GC - FPD. However, GC - FID method is of more practical significance in the application and promotion due to its universality.

关 键 词：乙硫醇 GC—FPD GC—FID 方法比较 

分 类 号：O655[理学—分析化学]