| 四种化学需氧量测定标准方法的比较 |
| The Comparison of Four Standard Methods for Chemical Oxygen Demand |
| 投稿时间：2009-05-04 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 低浓度化学需氧量 污水处理厂出水 |
| 英文关键词:COD of low concentration Effluent of wastewater treatment plant |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1679 |
| 全文下载次数: 1302 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 对国内外四种测定低浓度化学需氧量 (COD) 的方法进行了比对分析。从精密度、准确度、不确定度等方面对这四种方法进行了系统对比。结果表明,在测定低浓度COD的样品时,在准确度方面,除HJ/T399—2007[7]之外的其它三种方法中的任何一种都可以得到稳定可靠的回收率;在精密度方面,5220B.4b[3]和ISO15705—2002[4]的数据与标准文本中的参考数据具有一致性;在不确定度方面,四种方法相差不大,主要影响因素均为样品重复测定引起的不确定度;在方法间的差异及相关性上,采用HJ/T399—2007和其他三种方法得到的结果存在显著差异,而采用其它三种方法测定低浓度COD样品时,得到的结果没有显著差异,并且三种方法之间具有很好的相关性。在实际应用中,5220B.4b、ISO15705—2002 和GB 11914—89的数据之间存在较大的随机极差。对比结果表明,5220B.4b、ISO15705—2002和GB 11914—89具有可比性,得到的数据都可用。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| The present study focused on the comparison of four standard methods of chemical oxygen demand (COD). The four methods were compared systematically according to precision,accuracy,and uncertainty. When these methods were used to determine the samples containing lower concentrations of COD,except for HJ/T399-2007[7],their accuracy are all reliable; the precisions of 5220B.4b[3] and ISO15705-2002[4] are consistent; when considering of uncertainty,the main factor of them is the relative standard deviation caused by multiple determination; and we saw reliable recovery and relevant results among methods except for HJ/T399-2007. There are no significant difference among GB 11914-89,ISO 15705-2002 and 5220B.4b. In practical application,the range among GB 11914-89,ISO 15705-2002 and 5220B.4b is large occasionally. To sum up,GB 11914-89,ISO 15705-2002 and 5220B.4b are comparable,and their data are all available. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|
