Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/8606
Title: Field-portable Gas Chromatograph Mass Spectrometer (GC-MS) unit for semi-volatile compound analysis in groundwater
Authors: Badger Technical Services.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental and Munitions Center of Expertise.
FLIR Systems, Inc.
U.S. Army Environmental Command.
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (U.S.)
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (U.S.)
Bednar, Anthony J.
Russell, Amber L.
Georgian, Thomas.
Splichal, David E.
Hayes, Charolett A.
Tackett, Phil.
Justes, Dina.
Parker, L. V. (Louise V.)
Kirgan, Robert A.
Wells, Mitch.
Keywords: Field-Portable instrumentation
MC analysis
Real time analysis
Gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GC-MS)
Groundwater pollution
Groundwater monitoring
Instruments
Equipment
Jones, William T.
Publisher: Environmental Laboratory (U.S.)
Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)
Series/Report no.: ERDC TR ; 11-11.
Description: Technical Report
Abstract: This effort demonstrated the use of field-portable instrumentation for the quantification of munitions constituents in groundwater, without the need to ship water samples to a fixed analytical laboratory. The results indicate that similar reporting limits can be obtained using the field-portable instrument when coupled to solid phase extraction sample preparation, yet instrument stability at the low concentration range is an issue. The instrumentation was tested on 28 groundwater samples for a variety of analytes with concentrations ranging up to 3 orders of magnitude. Detection limits for the field instrumentation are generally below regulatory thresholds. Linear regression comparison of the field results to laboratory-based analysis suggest comparability between the techniques, with the slope of the regression for all analytes being between 0.8 and 1.2, except for TNB and RDX. The field results were about 70% of the laboratory results on the average. The field method consistently exhibits a significant positive bias for TNB. The field and laboratory TNB results were consistent in that both the field and laboratory methods reported non-detects.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11681/8606
Appears in Collections:Documents

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ERDC-TR-11-11.pdf1.65 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open