Nonlinear response and quenching effect in GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for quantitative sulfur analysis of low-sulfur hydrocarbon fuels

Xiaoliang Ma, Jae Hyung Kim, Chunshan Song

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

Abstract

Total sulfur analysis of various standard compounds, model fuel samples, and real gasoline samples was carried out using GC-FPD (GC coupled with a flame photometric detector), GC-PFPD (GC coupled with a pulsed flame photometric detector), and total sulfur analyzer (Antek 9000S). The nonlinear response of FPD and PFPD detectors for sulfur compounds and then quenching effect by the co-eluted hydrocarbons were examined. GC-FPD and GC-PFPD were unsuitable for quantitative analysis of the total sulfur concentration in complex hydrocarbon matrices if both the nonlinear response and the quenching effect, particularly for sulfur concentrations at low ppm level, were not considered. Ranges of errors from the application of GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for the total sulfur analysis were also analyzed. This is an abstract of a paper presented at the 227th ACS National Meeting (Anaheim, CA 3/28/2004-4/1/2004).

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalACS National Meeting Book of Abstracts
Volume227
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jun 1 2004
Event227th ACS National Meeting Abstracts of Papers - Anaheim, CA., United States
Duration: Mar 28 2004Apr 1 2004

Fingerprint

Hydrocarbons
Sulfur
Quenching
Detectors
Sulfur Compounds
Sulfur compounds
Gasoline
Chemical analysis

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Chemistry(all)
  • Chemical Engineering(all)

Cite this

@article{93e789a3cf16442d8b2de7965c63840e,
title = "Nonlinear response and quenching effect in GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for quantitative sulfur analysis of low-sulfur hydrocarbon fuels",
abstract = "Total sulfur analysis of various standard compounds, model fuel samples, and real gasoline samples was carried out using GC-FPD (GC coupled with a flame photometric detector), GC-PFPD (GC coupled with a pulsed flame photometric detector), and total sulfur analyzer (Antek 9000S). The nonlinear response of FPD and PFPD detectors for sulfur compounds and then quenching effect by the co-eluted hydrocarbons were examined. GC-FPD and GC-PFPD were unsuitable for quantitative analysis of the total sulfur concentration in complex hydrocarbon matrices if both the nonlinear response and the quenching effect, particularly for sulfur concentrations at low ppm level, were not considered. Ranges of errors from the application of GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for the total sulfur analysis were also analyzed. This is an abstract of a paper presented at the 227th ACS National Meeting (Anaheim, CA 3/28/2004-4/1/2004).",
author = "Xiaoliang Ma and Kim, {Jae Hyung} and Chunshan Song",
year = "2004",
month = "6",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "227",
journal = "ACS National Meeting Book of Abstracts",
issn = "0065-7727",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "2",

}

Nonlinear response and quenching effect in GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for quantitative sulfur analysis of low-sulfur hydrocarbon fuels. / Ma, Xiaoliang; Kim, Jae Hyung; Song, Chunshan.

In: ACS National Meeting Book of Abstracts, Vol. 227, No. 2, 01.06.2004.

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Nonlinear response and quenching effect in GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for quantitative sulfur analysis of low-sulfur hydrocarbon fuels

AU - Ma, Xiaoliang

AU - Kim, Jae Hyung

AU - Song, Chunshan

PY - 2004/6/1

Y1 - 2004/6/1

N2 - Total sulfur analysis of various standard compounds, model fuel samples, and real gasoline samples was carried out using GC-FPD (GC coupled with a flame photometric detector), GC-PFPD (GC coupled with a pulsed flame photometric detector), and total sulfur analyzer (Antek 9000S). The nonlinear response of FPD and PFPD detectors for sulfur compounds and then quenching effect by the co-eluted hydrocarbons were examined. GC-FPD and GC-PFPD were unsuitable for quantitative analysis of the total sulfur concentration in complex hydrocarbon matrices if both the nonlinear response and the quenching effect, particularly for sulfur concentrations at low ppm level, were not considered. Ranges of errors from the application of GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for the total sulfur analysis were also analyzed. This is an abstract of a paper presented at the 227th ACS National Meeting (Anaheim, CA 3/28/2004-4/1/2004).

AB - Total sulfur analysis of various standard compounds, model fuel samples, and real gasoline samples was carried out using GC-FPD (GC coupled with a flame photometric detector), GC-PFPD (GC coupled with a pulsed flame photometric detector), and total sulfur analyzer (Antek 9000S). The nonlinear response of FPD and PFPD detectors for sulfur compounds and then quenching effect by the co-eluted hydrocarbons were examined. GC-FPD and GC-PFPD were unsuitable for quantitative analysis of the total sulfur concentration in complex hydrocarbon matrices if both the nonlinear response and the quenching effect, particularly for sulfur concentrations at low ppm level, were not considered. Ranges of errors from the application of GC-FPD and GC-PFPD for the total sulfur analysis were also analyzed. This is an abstract of a paper presented at the 227th ACS National Meeting (Anaheim, CA 3/28/2004-4/1/2004).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2442489887&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2442489887&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference article

AN - SCOPUS:2442489887

VL - 227

JO - ACS National Meeting Book of Abstracts

JF - ACS National Meeting Book of Abstracts

SN - 0065-7727

IS - 2

ER -