4.7 Article

Predicting percent composition of blends of biodiesel and conventional diesel using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, and partial least squares analysis

期刊

TALANTA
卷 83, 期 4, 页码 1254-1259

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2010.07.084

关键词

Chromatography; Biodiesel; Chemometrics; Partial least squares analysis

资金

  1. Seattle Pacific University
  2. M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The percent composition of blends of biodiesel and conventional diesel from a variety of retail sources were modeled and predicted using partial least squares (PLS) analysis applied to gas chromatography-total-ion-current mass spectrometry (GC-TIC), gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography-total-ion-current mass spectrometry (GCxGC-TIC) and comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GCxGC-MS) separations of the blends. In all four cases, the PLS predictions for a test set of chromatograms were plotted versus the actual blend percent composition. The GC-TIC plot produced a best-fit line with slope = 0.773 and y-intercept = 2.89, and the average percent error of prediction was 12.0%. The GC-MS plot produced a best-fit line with slope = 0.864 and y-intercept = 1.72, and the average percent error of prediction was improved to 6.89%. The GCxGC-TIC plot produced a best-fit line with slope = 0.983 and y-intercept = 0.680, and the average percent error was slightly improved to 6.16%. The GCxGC-MS plot produced a best-fit line with slope = 0.980 and y-intercept = 0.620, and the average percent error was 6.12%. The GCxGC models performed best presumably due to the multidimensional advantage of higher dimensional instrumentation providing more chemical selectivity. All the PLS models used 3 latent variables. The chemical components that differentiate the blend percent compositions are reported. (c) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据