Flame ionization detector sensitivity

For selective estimation of phenols pollution of environment such chromatographic methods as gas chromatography with flame-ionization detector (ISO method 8165) and high performance liquid chromatography with UV-detector (EPA method 625) is recommended. For determination of phenol, cresols, chlorophenols in environmental samples application of HPLC with amperometric detector is perspective. Phenols and chlorophenols can be easy oxidized and determined with high sensitivity on carbon-glass electrode. 

Epichlorhydrin (ECH) detection starts with detecting epoxide cycle using hydrochloric acid in combination with sodium chloride the reaction product - 1,3-dichlorhydrin - is extracted in diethyl ether and concentrated by removing the latter. Gas-liquid chromatography with a flame-ionization detector is used to detect glycerin 1,3-dichlorhydrin. The sensitivity of the method is 0.01 mg/dm. ... 

By using a flame ionization detector (FID), most compounds having a bond of carbon and hydrogen can be measured. This detector was originally developed for gas chromatography and employs a sensitive electrometer that measures the change in ion intensity resulting from the combustion of air... 

For measuring the inert species, some of which are present in the majority of gases, the thermal-conductivity detector (TCD) is often the detector of choice for gas analyses. Since the TCD is a concentration detector and its sensitivity is lower than that of mass-flow detectors such as the flame-ionization detector (FID), relatively high concentrations of compounds in the carrier gas are needed. This means that packed columns, with their high loadability, are still quite popular for such analyses. 

The flame ionization detector Is the most popular of the flame-based detectors. Apart from a reduction in sensitivity compared to expectations based on gas chromatographic response factors [138] and incompatibility with the high flow rates of conventional bore columns (4-5 mm I. 0.), the flame ionization detector is every bit as easy to use in SFC as it is in gas chromatography [148,149]. It shows virtually no response to carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and sulfur hexafluoride mobile phases but is generally incompatible with other mobile phases and mixed mobile phases containing organic modifiers except for water and formic acid, other gas chromatographic detectors that have been used in SFC include the thermionic ionization detector (148,150], ... 

GC is coupled with many detectors for the analysis of pesticides in wastewater. At the present time the most popular is GC-MS, which will be discussed in more detail later in this section. The flame ionization detector (FID) is another nonselective detector that identifies compounds containing carbon but does not give specific information on chemical structure (but is often used for quantification because of the linear response and sensitivity). Other detectors are specific and only detect certain species or groups of pesticides. They include electron capture,nitrogen-phosphorus, thermionic specific, and flame photometric detectors. The electron capture detector (ECD) is very sensitive to chlorinated organic pesticides, such as the organochlorine compounds (OCs, DDT, dieldrin, etc.). It has a long history of use in many environmental methods,... 

Detectors range from the universal, but less sensitive, to the very sensitive but limited to a particular class of compounds. The thermal conductivity detector (TCD) is the least sensitive but responds to all classes of compounds. Another common detector is the flame ionization detector (FID), which is very sensitive but can only detect organic compounds. Another common and very sensitive detector is called electron capture. This detector is particularly sensitive to halogenated compounds, which can be particularly important when analyzing pollutants such as dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and polychlorobiphenyl (PCB) compounds. Chapter 13 provides more specific information about chromatographic methods applied to soil analysis. 

The analysis of organosulphur compounds has been greatly facilitated by the flame photometric detector [2], Volatile compounds can be separated by a glass capillary chromatographic column and the effluent split to a flame ionization detector and a flame photometric detector. The flame photometric detector response is proportional to [S2] [3-6]. The selectivity and enhanced sensitivity of the flame photometric detector for sulphur permits quantitation of organosulphur compounds at relatively low concentrations in complex organic mixtures. The flame ionization detector trace allows the organosulphur compounds to be referenced to the more abundant aliphatic and/or polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. 

Electron capture detectors are extremely sensitive (1 X 10 12 mol) but are specific for electrophilic compounds. However, they can be used in parallel with flame ionization detectors to identify specific peaks in a chromatogram. 

High-performance liquid chromatographic separation with electrochemical detection may provide the best sensitivity for phenol quantification in biological samples. The use of gas chromatography with a flame ionization detector may be a more versatile method, if other non-ionic pollutants must be quantified. The advantages and disadvantages of different methods available for the quantification of phenol and metabolites in biological and environmental samples have been discussed by Tesarova and Packova(1983). 

Figure 2.4 Comparison of (a) sensitivity, (b) variability, (c) selectivity, and (d) pricing between various chemical and immunological analyses for the presence of PPCPs in the environment. FID = flame ionization detector and EC = electrochemical detection. Note that GC-MS-MS can have mass detectors such as triple quadrupole and ion trap with ionization from El = electron ionization or Cl = chemical ionization, whereas LC-MS-MS with ionization from ESI = electrospray ionization, APCI = atmospheric pressure chemical ionization, or APPI = atmospheric pressure photoionization. (Adapted from Ingerslev and HaUing-Sprensen, 2003.)...

---