Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (4)
Schlagworte
- Antiozonants (1)
- Food contact materials (1)
- Gas analysis (1)
- Gaschromatographie (1)
- Methan (1)
- Nitrogen (1)
- Purity analysis (1)
- Ringversuch (1)
- Rubber (1)
- Spurenverunreinigungen (1)
This key comparison was performed to demonstrate the capability of NMIs to analyse the purity of methane for use as a source gas in the preparation of standard gas mixtures. This capability is an essential requirement for the preparation of accurate standards of natural gas and some other fuels.
Since it is difficult to carry out a comparison with individual samples of pure gas, the sample for this comparison was a synthetic mixture of high purity methane with selected added impurities of nitrogen, argon, carbon dioxide and ethane. These mixtures were prepared by a gas company as a batch of 10 cylinders and their homogeneity and stability were evaluated by NMIJ.
The KCRVs for the four different analytes in this key comparison are based on a consensus of values reported by participants. The uncertainties in the degrees of equivalence were calculated by combining the reported uncertainties with the homogeneity of the samples and the uncertainty of the KCRV. The results submitted are generally consistent with the KCRV within the estimated uncertainties.
Finally, this comparison demonstrates that the analysis of nitrogen, argon, carbon dioxide and ethane in methane at amount fractions of 1 µmol/mol to 5 µmol/mol is generally possible with an uncertainty of 5% to 10%.
Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.
The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).
DatesIssue 1A (Technical Supplement 2012)
This project concerns the purity analysis of nitrogen as used in reference gas mixture preparation. This project was carried out without adding impurities to the gas used for this comparison, and is therefore more representative to evaluate the analysis of CO, CO2, CH4, O2, Ar and H2O impurities in high purity nitrogen. The analysis of the amount–of–substance fraction water was optional.
Two 50 litre high purity nitrogen cylinders were purchased from a well-qualified supplier of specialty gases. The listed components were expected to be present in the pure nitrogen at the target levels as a result of the purification of the nitrogen. From the start of this comparison it was clear that the comparison may not lead to reference values for the constituents analysed.
The results indicate that analyses of high purity gases are often limited by the limits of detection of analytical equipment used. The reports of the participating laboratories also indicate that there is no agreed method of determination of the uncertainty on a detection Limit value. The results provide useful information on the Performance of participants. For all analysed components there is reasonable agreement in results for LNE, VSL, Metas and NPL.
For BAM only the Argon result is in agreement.