4.5 Article

Validation of Calibration Parameters for Trapped Ion Mobility Spectrometry

期刊

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1007/s13361-019-02289-1

关键词

Trapped ion mobility spectrometry; Drift-tube ion mobility spectrometry; Ion mobility calibration; Mass spectrometry

资金

  1. Department of Chemistry of the Washington State University
  2. NSF [CHE-1506672]
  3. DTRA Basic Research Program [HDTRA1-14-1-0023]
  4. Bruker Daltonics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using contemporary theory for ion mobility spectrometry (IMS), gas-phase ion mobilities within a trapped ion mobility-mass spectrometer (TIMS) are not easily deduced using first principle equations due to non-linear pressure changes and consequently variations in E/N. It is for this reason that prior literature values have traditionally been used for TIMS calibration. Additionally, given that verified mobility standards currently do not exist and the that the exact conditions used to measure reported literature values may not always represent the environment within the TIMS, a direct approach to validating the behavior of the TIMS system is warranted. A calibration procedure is presented where an ambient pressure, ambient temperature, two-gate, printed circuit board drift-tube IMS (PCBIMS) is coupled to the front of a TIMS allowing reduced mobilities to be directly measured on the same instrument as the TIMS. These measured mobilities were used to evaluate the TIMS calibration procedure which correlates reduced mobility and TIMS elution voltages with literature values. When using the measured PCBIMS-reduced mobilities of tetraalkyl ammonium salts and tune mix for TIMS calibration of the alkyltrimethyl ammonium salts, the percent error is less than 1% as compared with using the reported literature K-0 values where the percent error approaches 5%. This method provides a way to obtain accurate reference mobilities for ion mobility techniques that require a calibration step (i.e., TIMS and TWAVE).

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

4.5
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