1972
DOI: 10.1093/chromsci/10.10.600
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improvements in the Performance of the Thermal Conductivity Detector

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1973
1973
1976
1976

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These lower sensitivity limits of 50-100 ppm can be compared with those for a typical TCD (14), used as a continuous monitor, which could be expected to detect a 1-ppm impurity in a helium or hydrogen stream. The linear range of the TCD has been extended by constant filament temperature (15) and constant current (16) operation. Even with these linearity improvements, however, the TCD would appear to be about one order of magnitude less predictable than the MXD, over the full 0-1 molar fraction range, in terms of percentage deviation of predicted response (as span fraction) from actual response.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…These lower sensitivity limits of 50-100 ppm can be compared with those for a typical TCD (14), used as a continuous monitor, which could be expected to detect a 1-ppm impurity in a helium or hydrogen stream. The linear range of the TCD has been extended by constant filament temperature (15) and constant current (16) operation. Even with these linearity improvements, however, the TCD would appear to be about one order of magnitude less predictable than the MXD, over the full 0-1 molar fraction range, in terms of percentage deviation of predicted response (as span fraction) from actual response.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where X is the instantaneous molar fraction of this component in the carrier gas (from relation 16), f is the instantaneous (carrier plus sample) detector molar gas flow rate, t is the elapsed time from sample injection, Sm is the molar sample volume and T represents the integration time limits set by an appropriate peak window.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations