新型动态激光粒度粒形仪分析结果的对比与评价  

EVALUATION OF A NEW DYNAMIC LASER PARTICLE SIZE &SHAPE ANALYZER AND COMPARISON WITH THE SIEVING AND LASER DIFFRACTION PARTICLE SIZE ANALYZER

作　　者：赵旭锋 贾建军[1] 王欣凯[1] 蔡廷禄[1] 杨阳[1] 时连强[1] 夏小明[1] 

机构地区：[1]国家海岛开发与管理研究中心,国家海洋局第二海洋研究所,杭州310012

出　　处：《海洋地质与第四纪地质》2015年第6期175-184,共10页Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology

基　　金：中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务专项资金(SIOSOA-JT1107);国家自然科学基金项目(41376068);海洋公益性行业科研专项经费资助(201005010-3)

摘　　要：对140个海滩砂样筛取0.5Φ间隔的子样共455个,分别用QICPIC快速粒度粒形仪和HELOS激光粒度仪做对比测试。结果显示：与筛分法相比,QICPIC快速粒度粒形仪和HELOS激光粒度仪的中值粒径普遍偏粗、粒径值偏小0.25~0.5Φ,同时测量结果的粒径范围更宽;HELOS激光粒度仪较QICPIC快速粒度粒形仪对细颗粒和粗颗粒部分敏感;球形度与粒径大致呈负相关关系。HELOS激光粒度仪与QICPIC快速粒度粒形仪的结果存在显著的线性相关关系,一般情况下可用公式（H=1.020 4×Q＋0.047 9）从QICPIC粒径转换出HELOS粒径。两种激光粒度仪（QICPIC快速粒度粒形仪和HELOS激光粒度仪）与筛分法的粒度分析结果差异的主要原因是测量原理不同和海滩砂的不规则形状。QICPIC快速粒度粒形仪和HELOS激光粒度仪之间的差异原因有测量原理的不同、取样的不可重复性以及分散系统不同。140 samples of beach sand collected in Hainan and Zhejiang Provinces were sieved for 0.5Ф interval and 455 sub-samples were obtained. These sub-samples are used to test QICPIC, a new dynamic laser particle size ＆shape analyzer. The results are compared with those by HELOS, a laser diffraction particle size analyzer. It is found that comparing to sieving method, the median particle size given by both QICPIC and HELOS are coarser, or about 0.25-0.5Ф finer in Phi- diameter. The ranges of particle size measured by QICPIC and HELOS are wider. The HELOS is more sensitive to both fine and coarse fractions than QICPIC. Sphericity and particle size shows an approximately negative correlation. There is a significant linear correlation between median particle size measured by HELOS and QICPIC. Therefore, a formula（H =1. 020 4×Q＋0. 047 9）is suggested in this paper to transform the median particle size given by QICPIC into that of HELOS. The difference of the results between the laser particle size analyzers （QICPIC and HELOS） and sieving method is mainly from the difference in measuring principles, the non-repeatability of sampling and the dispersion.

关 键 词：粒度 筛分 激光粒度仪 砂 

分 类 号：P585.2[天文地球—岩石学]