Version 1
: Received: 21 October 2024 / Approved: 21 October 2024 / Online: 22 October 2024 (08:39:13 CEST)
How to cite:
Abhiram, G. Comparison of Exetainer Evacuation Methods for Mitigating Residual Gas Effects in Nitrous Oxide Gas Concentration. Preprints2024, 2024101669. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202410.1669.v1
Abhiram, G. Comparison of Exetainer Evacuation Methods for Mitigating Residual Gas Effects in Nitrous Oxide Gas Concentration. Preprints 2024, 2024101669. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202410.1669.v1
Abhiram, G. Comparison of Exetainer Evacuation Methods for Mitigating Residual Gas Effects in Nitrous Oxide Gas Concentration. Preprints2024, 2024101669. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202410.1669.v1
APA Style
Abhiram, G. (2024). Comparison of Exetainer Evacuation Methods for Mitigating Residual Gas Effects in Nitrous Oxide Gas Concentration. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202410.1669.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Abhiram, G. 2024 "Comparison of Exetainer Evacuation Methods for Mitigating Residual Gas Effects in Nitrous Oxide Gas Concentration" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202410.1669.v1
Abstract
Residual gas in exetainer vials leads to nitrous oxide (N2O) gas underestimation. This study compared four evacuation methods such as gas exchange by displacement (GED), evacuation with a vacuum pump (VP), evacuation with a syringe (VS) and pre-evacuated Exetainer (PEE) to assess the residual gas effect on gas sample concentration. PEE and VP methods showed superior performance, displaying lower deviations from actual gas concentrations with RMSE values of 0.239 and 0.179, respectively, at 12.5 ppm standard gas levels. Conversely, GED and VS methods exhibited higher deviations with RMSE values of 0.740 and 0.448, respectively, at 12.5 ppm. Errors were more pronounced at lower gas concentrations. To address residual gas effects in GED and VS methods, standard gases were stored for calibration in evacuated vials (EVM) matching the sample collection method, rather than in syringes (SM). This EVM approach enhanced precision by 14.43% and 6.24% for GED and VS methods, respectively, at 0.781 ppm standard gas levels. The study concludes that PEE and VP methods are more reliable for vial evacuation. Using vials prepared using the same method as sample collection vials can mitigate residual gas effects effectively. This study holds substantial importance in enhancing the accurate measurement of greenhouse gas emissions, particularly focusing on nitrous oxide.
Environmental and Earth Sciences, Environmental Science
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
