4.7 Article

A High-Resolution Mass Spectrometer for the Experimental Study of the Gas Composition in Planetary Environments: First Laboratory Results

期刊

AEROSPACE
卷 10, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/aerospace10060522

关键词

high-resolution mass spectrometer; Orbitrap; continuous ion source; no C-trap; ion optics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new laboratory Orbitrap mass spectrometer called OLYMPIA has been developed and used to test and develop technologies for the next generation of spaceborne mass spectrometers. It has also been used to study high-resolution space-relevant chemical processes.
A new laboratory Orbitrap (TM) cell-based mass spectrometer, OLYMPIA (Orbitrap anaLYseur MultiPle IonisAtion), without a C-trap module, has been developed and constructed. The first operation of the Orbitrap (TM) cell-based device with the continuous ion source and without the C-trap module is reported. OLYMPIA is being developed and used as a workbench platform to test and develop technologies for the next generation of spaceborne mass spectrometers and as a laboratory instrument to perform high-resolution studies of space-relevant chemical processes. This instrument has been used to measure the quantitative composition of CO/N-2/C2H4 mixtures of the same nominal mass using an electron ionization ion source. The relative abundance of ions has been measured using a short acquisition time (up to 250 ms) with a precision of better than 10% (for most abundant ions) and a mass resolution of 30,000-50,000 (full width at half maximum) over the mass range of m/z 28-86. The achieved mass accuracy of measurements is better than 20 ppm. This performance level is sufficient to resolve and identify the CO/N-2/C2H4 components of the mixtures. The dynamic range and relative ion abundance measurements have been evaluated using a reference normal isotopic distribution of krypton gas. The measurement accuracy is about 10% for the 4 most abundant isotopes; 6 isotopes are detectable.

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