I am curious if anyone has had any luck quantifying headspace CO and/or H2 using any methods besides GC. Are there any methods out there that are accurate, efficient, and relatively inexpensive? I am planning on using GC but was curious if there was some other method I was missing.
GC is the most reliable technique. Use Ar as a carrier gas and you will control the leak of air into your reactor by looking at the peak of N2. Don't bother yourself with other techniques unless you have problems with GC
GC is the most reliable. Use Ar as a carrier gas and you will see a leak of air into your system by following the peak of N2. TCDetector is very sensitive to H2 but modestly sensitive to CO
I've used a gas-phase mass spectrometer to analyze carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen content. It was at least as accurate as a GC and had the benefit of being significantly faster. Stanford research makes all-in-one units like a QMS-200 that can interface using their software or LabView.
If you only need ppm or higher you can use portable electrochemical CO and H2 detectors that cost just 200-300 and can datalog continuous exposure.
Albert, have you used any of those before? Know any specific models? It would be interesting to compare vs. GC.
If you want environmental values of CO and H2 I guess nothing beats the GC-RCP from Peak Laboratories, CA. The machine has a price but is incredibly sensitive (low ppb range), anybody can work with it, and doesn't really have any maintenance for years.... Carrier gas is air.
here is the link: http://www.peaklaboratories.com/products/performer_1rcp.html
I think that the main problem is the calibration of any method: matrix (air, other vapors...)? concentration ranges to cover?
Good luck, J-F
Hello everyone,
I am going with a GC for now, but it would be for detection of the CO and H2 in a CO2 atmosphere during catalytic or electrocatalytic CO2 reduction.
Thank you for your answers!
Sincerely,
Kyle Grice