STP1282: Soil Gas Sample Analysis Method Evaluation and Comparison

    Calkins, CC
    Project Scientist, Environmental Toxicology/Industrial Hygiene, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., Syracuse, New York

    Gabriel, CA
    Scientist, Environmental Toxicology/Industrial Hygiene, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., Syracuse, New York

    Banikowski, JE
    Managing Scientist, Environmental Toxicology/Industrial Hygiene, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., Syracuse, New York

    Pages: 5    Published: Jan 1996


    Abstract

    The quality of soil gas survey data is a function of many variables, particularly the analytical method used to analyze the collected samples. Several analytical methods are commonly employed, including direct reading photoionization detectors, portable gas chromatographs (GCs), and mobile laboratories equipped with benchtop GCs. Two analytical methods employing Hewlett-Packard (HP) 5890 Series II GCs were compared relative to their sensitivity, precision, accuracy, practicality, and productivity. The first method utilized direct injection as the method of sample introduction, and the second, a Tekmar LSC 2000/ALS 2016 purge and trap autosampler. The direct injection method provided greater accuracy, precision, and ease of use, while the purge and trap autosampler method provided increased sensitivity and higher productivity.

    Keywords:

    vadose zone, direct injection, purge and trap, autosampler, gas chromatograph, accuracy, precision, percent recovery, standard deviation, relative standard deviation


    Paper ID: STP16585S

    Committee/Subcommittee: D34.01

    DOI: 10.1520/STP16585S


    CrossRef ASTM International is a member of CrossRef.