24.11.2012 Views

Space Grant Consortium - University of Wisconsin - Green Bay

Space Grant Consortium - University of Wisconsin - Green Bay

Space Grant Consortium - University of Wisconsin - Green Bay

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 1 shows peak areas for <strong>of</strong>fgassing from 107999 as a function <strong>of</strong> time when a significant<br />

number <strong>of</strong> integrated peaks are present.<br />

Discussion<br />

Figure 1: Peak Areas Over Time<br />

The response factors calculated using the new data were different from the previous response<br />

factors. There was no trend as to whether they were higher or lower as they varied between<br />

components. Since these values were calculated based on standard solutions this would suggest<br />

these values would have high accuracy. For a lot <strong>of</strong> compounds from <strong>of</strong>fgassing there were only<br />

default response factors which have little accuracy, so new calculated response factors give a<br />

better idea <strong>of</strong> what they should be.<br />

When the Mixes for response factors were placed in separate chambers and baked, the peak areas<br />

were inconsistent due to different chambers having different seals. Unequal seals were expected<br />

but the extent to which chambers were different was unexpected. To get more consistent results<br />

a single chamber had to be used for each different test. While this did allow more accurate<br />

results to be found the drawback was the time involved with running tests one at a time. Since<br />

the seals were unequal, there was no way around this problem, which was important to discover<br />

for future experimentation.<br />

When samples <strong>of</strong> 108193 and Mix 1 were run, it was clear that 108193 did not <strong>of</strong>fgas well. The<br />

largest peak detected on the Autosystem GC/FID was the injection peak, followed by the column<br />

peak. Injection and column peaks were the only peaks seen on the Agilent 6890 GC/FID. When<br />

the sample was run on the Incos GC-MS, there was no flat baseline and only a few small peaks<br />

were observed, consistent with the GC results. Spectra <strong>of</strong> Mix 1 showed strong peaks<br />

corresponding to the components Mix 1, and the spectra <strong>of</strong> the Mix and 108193 only showed<br />

peaks corresponding to Mix 1. Any interactions between Mix 1 and 108193 were too small to<br />

identify.<br />

Both 108053 and Mix 4 <strong>of</strong>fgasssing produced dichlorobenzene, and for 108053, it was the only<br />

quantifiable <strong>of</strong>fgas. However, when they were baked together in a chamber and run on GCMS<br />

6

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!