Chromatography Techniques

Biography

Biography: Kamal Saud Alblawi

Abstract

The detection of several kinds of trace explosives has become enormously important in order to protect people, infrastructures, and properties. Consequently, this project compares two analysis techniques—HPLC and GC—to determine which is faster, more selective, more sensitive, gives higher resolution and is more accurate, even with the smallest quantities, without requiring difficult sample preparation, for detecting trace explosives. Six representative explosive compounds (2-NP, 3-NP, 4- NP, 2,4 DNT, 2,6 DNT and 1,3 DNT) on three different surfaces (glass, plastic, and wood) were analysed with both HPLC-DAD and GC-MS. Several dilutions, ranging from 1.0 mg mL-1 to1.0 ng mL-1 , and two different calibration curves were made for each compound based on the results for each instrument. The results indicated that the 2, 3 and 4 nitrophenols seem to have better stability and recovery than other compounds, particularly when using GC-MS. A better recovery was obtained when using a glass surface, which was followed by plastic and then wood surfaces, with wood having the poorest recovery. For example, the 4-NP has been recovered with a measurement of 324.25 ng mL-1 , 164.45 ng mL-1 and 23.5 ng mL-1 for glass, plastic and wood respectively. Sometimes the trace explosive could only be detected when using GC-MS, as it is more sensitive than HPLC-DAD.