- 學位論文
定容剛性容器應用於排放管道VOCs檢測技術之探究
Application of the Cylinder to VOCs Analysis on the Exhaust Gas of Stacks
摘要
本研究依環保署最新所公告方法NIEA A734.70B中，以Tedlar Bag進行檢測分析，但此方法僅針對24項之VOCs(C5-C10)，因考量在煙道所排放氣體錯綜複雜，亦有高碳數之化合物排出，而高碳數化合物在室溫下因揮發性較低，如以Tedlar Bag採集可能會冷凝附著於袋璧上，以致在分析高碳數之化合物造成困難；另外，目前國內外相關之非極性有機化合物環境檢測技術方法皆尚未提及定容剛性容器之技術方法及可行性，本研究以定容剛性容器建立排放管道中烷、烯、炔及芳香烴等化合物之採樣與檢測技術，並驗證其可行性。 研究結果顯示，以Tedlar Bag採集極性與非極性化合物發現有冷凝吸附效應與化合物滲透效應發生。定容剛性容器抽引進樣法若與NIEA A715.12B不?鋼採樣筒檢測法之相關品保品管檢量線於0.985以上、準確度於±30%、精密度為±25%比較，則定容剛性容器之檢量線、準確度與精密度針對C5-C10分析，R2線性介於0.985-0.996，準確度70%-135% ，精密度2.8%-14.0%，而C11-C14四項物種明顯不佳；檢量線正十三烷與正十四烷介於0.95-0.96，準確度C11-C14介於53%-161%，精密度C11-C14雖無超出±25%亦高於±20%。 定容剛性容器迴流進樣法，就低碳數VOCs之整體變動範圍準確度小於±10%，精密度小於±3%而言，則是遠較抽引進樣法低於許多。C8以上物種之準確度101%-201%及精密度±9.42%-±16.67%。而碳數C8以上之化合物變動較高之原因，可能為，因迴流進樣法之加壓進樣方式，在進樣時剛性容器內氣體以不同等之壓力進樣，以致無法控制進樣氣體固定量，使得分析結果變動較高。 此外，定容剛性容器抽引進樣法與迴流進樣法現場煙道採集分析檢測方式比較；可能原因為進樣方式與物種化學特性物同，導致GC/FID分析結果較為偏低。
並列摘要
This research is focus on analyzing the Tedlar bag test of NIEA A734.70, published by Environmental Protection Administration, Taiwan. However, this method only focus on 24 species VOCs (C5-C10), because of considering the complex factor of discharging gas, and the compound which including high carbon. It causes the condensation on analyzing C11-C14 VOCs with the higher molecular weight, which are low evaporating for collecting the coagulation on the bag in the room temperature. Meanwhile, the method of non-extreme organic compound environmental assay never mentions the avail of cylinder technology. This research focuses on the cylinder method and verifies the avail of its assay technology and collecting the alkane, terpene, alkyne, hydrocarbon and other compounds in the pipe. The result shows that there are the affections on cold coagulation and compound diosmose by the Tedlar Bag method to collect the extreme and non-extreme compounds. Comparing the quality control line (above 0.985), precision around ±30% and the accuracy ±25% by cylinder draw out method and NIEA A715.12B canister method. However, draw out of cylinder method focus the C5-C10 However, cylinder accuracy and precision for C5-C10 VOC analysis, R-squre between 0.985-0.996, the accuracy of 70% -135%, the precision of 2.8% -14.0%, but obviously the species of C11-C14 VOCs; R-squre of n-tridecane and n-tetradecane between 0.95-0.96, the accuracy of the C11-C14 VOCs between 53%-161%, the precision is no excess of ± 25% but as well as high In the ± 20%. By the circulating method of cylinder, the accuracy of C5-C8 VOCs is less than ± 10%, and precision of less than ±3%, opposite the draw out of cylinder high than many. C9-C14 species the accuracy of 101%-201% and precision of ±9.42%-±16.67%. C9-C14 species change over of the higher reasons, may be due to the circulating method of cylinder sampling into the GC/FID of pressure is not to agree with more higher variation. In addition, exhaust gas of stacks collection of detection compared by circulating and draw out of cylinder method due to sampling into methods and chemical characteristics of the same species, resulting in GC / FID analysis is relatively low.