Comparison of Signal-to-noise, Blank Determination, and - Universiti ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Styrene 0.995 802 0.03 13 73 Table 5. Results of the statistical evaluation of the linear regression curve Compound Observed value, Fobs (1,69,0.5%) Regression test Lack-of-fit test Critical value Fcrit (1,69,0.5%) Observed value, Fobs (5,69,0.5%) Toluene 7923.943 0.714 Ethylbenzene 6175.352 0.157 iso-Propylbenzene 10677.743 3.993 0.223 n-Propylbenzene 7827.221 0.286 Styrene 12309.553 0.360 Table 6. Summary of estimated LOD by different methods Compound Estimated LOD, µg/mL Method Signal-to- noise Blank Linear regression determination s s res Toluene 0.16 0.12 0.06 0.34 Ethylbenzene 0.16 0.12 0.07 0.38 iso-Propylbenzene 0.17 0.11 0.05 0.29 n-Propylbenzene 0.15 0.09 0.06 0.34 Styrene 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.27 Table 7. Summary of estimated LOQ by different methods Compound Estimated LOQ, µg/mL Method Signal-to- noise Blank Linear regression determination s y0 s res Toluene 0.54 0.28 0.20 1.15 Ethylbenzene 0.52 0.26 0.22 1.27 iso-Propylbenzene 0.56 0.23 0.17 0.97 n-Propylbenzene 0.51 0.18 0.20 1.13 Styrene 0.50 0.20 0.16 0.91 y0 Critical value Fcrit (5,69,0.5%) 2.361 8
Figure 1. GC-FID chromatogram of a 1.0 µg/mL standard solution of the five test compounds. Chromatographic conditions: column CP-WAX 52CB WCOT (30 m × 0.25 mm I.D., 0.25 µm film thickness), carrier gas helium, 8 mL/min, temperature program: 50°C (5 min), increased to 110°C at 4°C/min, and increased at 20°C/min to 230°C (held for 4 min). Peaks: toluene [1], ethylbenzene [2], iso-propylbenzene [3], n-propylbenzene [4] and styrene [5]. 9
Page 1 and 2: Comparison of Signal-to-noise, Blan
Page 3 and 4: LOD ≅ x + 3s bi bi bi LOQ ≅ x +
Page 5 and 6: Blank determination was carried out
Page 7: Table 1. Concentrations of test com

Comparison of Signal-to-noise, Blank Determination, and - Universiti ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?