滕州市浩瀚色譜儀器技術(shù)服務(wù)有限公司，對非甲烷總烴自動連續(xù)監(jiān)測系統(tǒng)進(jìn)行示值誤差、響應(yīng)時間、零點漂移和量程漂移等性能測試，對非甲烷總烴便攜式分析儀進(jìn)行檢出限、度、準(zhǔn)確度等性能測試。性能測試滿足相關(guān)要求后同時利用便攜式催化氧化-氫火焰離子化檢測器法（催化氧化-FID）、便攜式氣相色譜-氫火焰離子化檢測器法（GC-FID）和實驗室氣相色譜-氫火焰離子化檢測器法（GC-FID）對固定污染源非甲烷總烴自動連續(xù)監(jiān)測系統(tǒng)進(jìn)行現(xiàn)場比對測試。測試結(jié)果表明，在工況變動較大的情況下，便攜式FID法與實驗室GC-FID法測試結(jié)果相對誤差為19.6%~35.1%，具有很好的可比性。以實驗室GC-FID法為參比方法時，自動連續(xù)監(jiān)測系統(tǒng)相對準(zhǔn)確度為64.1%，不滿足《固定污染源廢氣非甲烷總烴連續(xù)監(jiān)測系統(tǒng)技術(shù)要求及檢測方法》（HJ 1013—2018）的要求。以便攜式FID為參比方法時，自動連續(xù)監(jiān)測系統(tǒng)相對準(zhǔn)確度分別為28.6%和35.3%，相對《固定污染源廢氣總烴、甲烷和非甲烷總烴的測定氣相色譜法》（HJ 38—2017）方法一致性好，均能滿足《HJ 1013—2018》的要求。提出，應(yīng)推進(jìn)便攜式方法在自動連續(xù)監(jiān)測系統(tǒng)驗收和質(zhì)控比對中的應(yīng)用。

固定污染源非甲烷總烴自動連續(xù)監(jiān)測 圖片：


Automatic continuous monitoring of non-methane total hydrocarbons from stationary sources
Automatic continuous monitoring of non-methane total hydrocarbons from stationary sources.

Stationary phase: modified molecular sieve
Specification: 30m*0.53mm*25um
Model: HH-PLOT-Molecular sieve
Application: Technical Requirements and Test Methods for Continuous Monitoring System for Non-Methane Total Hydrocarbons from Fixed Sources of Waste Gas (HJ 1013-2018)
Tengzhou Haohao Chromatography Instrument Technology Service Co., Ltd. performs performance tests on indication error, response time, zero drift and range drift of non-methane total hydrocarbon automatic continuous monitoring system, and detects and limits the non-methane total hydrocarbon portable analyzer. Performance testing such as degree and accuracy. The performance test meets the relevant requirements while using the portable catalytic oxidation-hydrogen flame ionization detector method (catalytic oxidation-FID), portable gas chromatography-hydrogen flame ionization detector (GC-FID) and laboratory gas chromatography-hydrogen flame The ionization detector method (GC-FID) performs on-site comparison test on the automatic continuous monitoring system of non-methane total hydrocarbons with fixed pollution sources. The test results show that the relative error between the portable FID method and the laboratory GC-FID method is 19.6%~35.1% under the condition of large changes in working conditions, which is very comparable. When the laboratory GC-FID method is used as the reference method, the relative accuracy of the automatic continuous monitoring system is 64.1%, which does not meet the technical requirements and detection methods of the continuous pollution source non-methane total hydrocarbon continuous monitoring system (HJ 1013-2018). Claim. When the portable FID is used as the reference method, the relative accuracy of the automatic continuous monitoring system is 28.6% and 35.3%, respectively, compared with the "Gas Chromatography for Determination of Total Hydrocarbons, Methane and Non-Methane Total Hydrocarbons from Fixed Sources" (HJ 38-2017) The method is more consistent and can meet the requirements of HJ 1013-2018. It is proposed that the application of portable methods in the acceptance and quality control comparison of automatic continuous monitoring systems should be promoted.

Automatic continuous monitoring of non-methane total hydrocarbons from stationary sources