자동연속흐름-흡광광도법과 DNPH-LC법에 의한 먹는물 중 포름알데히드 정량분석 비교 (Comparison of ACFAS method and DNPH-LC method for quantitative analysis of formaldehyde in Drinking water)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 대한상하수도학회
· 수록지 정보 : 상하수도학회지 / 27권 / 6호 / 827 ~ 836페이지
· 저자명 : 이건호, 윤인철, 김영관, 김종철, 최금종, 이택수

초록

Due to the stringent drinking water quality, formaldehyde will be included in Korean drinking water standard from year 2014. However, its standard analytical method has not yet been established. This study compares two analytical methods, DNPH-LC and ACFAS with respect to their analysis principles, Method Detection Limit (MDL), Limit Of Quantitation(LOQ), precision, accuracy, reproducibility, convenience, number of samples analyzed per hour and analysis cost. These methods measure absorption intensity at 360 nm by using HPLC after DNPH-derivatization (DNPH-LC) and at 410 nm by using Automated Continuous Flow Absorption Spectrophotometer (ACFAS), respectively. Reproducibility was tested by repeating the analysis 7 times using a standard solution for each method. For DNPH-LC method, MDL was 0.5 ㎍/L, LOQ was 1.58 ㎍/L with standard deviation of 0.16 ㎍/L. For ACFAS method, they were 0.27 ㎍/L, 0.85 ㎍/L with standard deviation of 0.09 ㎍/L, respectively. Both methods satisfied the requirement set by the Korean drinking water quality standard. Complexity of sample pretreatment procedure for DNPH-LC method may cause large error and, consequently, the analytical result will depend on the level of skill of analyst. In contrast, ACFAS method which used only one reagent equipped with an automated injection device showed little analytical error. It costs about $5.00 and $1.00 for one sample to analyze by the DNPH-LC method and the ACFAS method, respectively. Compared to the DNPH-LC method, ACFAS method provided more reliable analytical results. In terms of convenience, easiness and analytical cost, ACFAS method was demonstrated to be superior to the DNPH-LC method. The results of this study suggested that the ACFAS method could be adapted as a proper method for determining formaldehyde content in drinking water.

영어초록

Due to the stringent drinking water quality, formaldehyde will be included in Korean drinking water standard from year 2014. However, its standard analytical method has not yet been established. This study compares two analytical methods, DNPH-LC and ACFAS with respect to their analysis principles, Method Detection Limit (MDL), Limit Of Quantitation(LOQ), precision, accuracy, reproducibility, convenience, number of samples analyzed per hour and analysis cost. These methods measure absorption intensity at 360 nm by using HPLC after DNPH-derivatization (DNPH-LC) and at 410 nm by using Automated Continuous Flow Absorption Spectrophotometer (ACFAS), respectively. Reproducibility was tested by repeating the analysis 7 times using a standard solution for each method. For DNPH-LC method, MDL was 0.5 ㎍/L, LOQ was 1.58 ㎍/L with standard deviation of 0.16 ㎍/L. For ACFAS method, they were 0.27 ㎍/L, 0.85 ㎍/L with standard deviation of 0.09 ㎍/L, respectively. Both methods satisfied the requirement set by the Korean drinking water quality standard. Complexity of sample pretreatment procedure for DNPH-LC method may cause large error and, consequently, the analytical result will depend on the level of skill of analyst. In contrast, ACFAS method which used only one reagent equipped with an automated injection device showed little analytical error. It costs about $5.00 and $1.00 for one sample to analyze by the DNPH-LC method and the ACFAS method, respectively. Compared to the DNPH-LC method, ACFAS method provided more reliable analytical results. In terms of convenience, easiness and analytical cost, ACFAS method was demonstrated to be superior to the DNPH-LC method. The results of this study suggested that the ACFAS method could be adapted as a proper method for determining formaldehyde content in drinking water.

참고자료

· 없음