Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Comparison of cartridge and membrane solid-phase extraction for preconcentration of nitroaromatic and nitramine explosives from water
Authors: U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency.
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Environmental Laboratory (U.S.)
Jenkins, Thomas F.
Miyares, Paul H.
Myers, Karen F.
McCormick, Erika F.
Strong, Ann B.
Keywords: Chemical analysis
Solid-phase extraction
Soil contamination
Salting-out extraction
Solvent extraction
Organic compounds
Soil pollution
Publisher: Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (U.S.)
Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)
Series/Report no.: Special report (Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (U.S.)) ; 92-25.
Description: Special Report
Abstract: Salting-out solvent extraction (SOE) was compared with cartridge and membrane solid phase extraction (SPE) for preconcentration of nitroaromatic and nitramine explosives from water, prior to reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatographic analysis (RP-HPLC). The procedures were compared initially using reagent grade water fortified with TNT, RDX, HMX and nine other analytes at concentrations below what could be determined without preconcentration and the results were used to estimate analyte recovery and the low concentration detection capability, as characterized by the Certified Reporting Limit (CRL). CRLs for the three procedures were comparable with values generally in the range of 0.05to 0.30 μL. Percentage recoveries for the three procedures were generally greater than 90%, except for those of HMX and RDX obtained by the membrane-SPE procedure. A second comparison among the three procedures was obtained on 58 groundwater samples from the Rockeye site at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane, Indiana. Results from a direct analysis procedure were compared to those from the three preconcentration techniques to estimate percent recovery of HMX, RDX and TNTfor real samples. Recoveries were greater than 80% except for HMX and RDX by the membrane-SPE method. Both SPE procedures exhibited background interferences, which the authors attribute to matrix interaction with the SPE polymers. Usability of the three procedures in a production-oriented laboratory was evaluated with emphasis on solvent consumption, waste production and sample processing time. The cartridge-SPE was judged to be the least rugged of the three procedures.
Rights: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Appears in Collections:Special Report

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
SR-92-25.pdf3 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail