ISOGEOCHEM Archives

Stable Isotope Geochemistry

ISOGEOCHEM@LIST.UVM.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"H.A.J. Meijer" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Stable Isotope Geochemistry <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:22:08 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
Dear Colleagues,

The question by Jean-Pierre Girard and the following discussion is
most interesting to me, as we are in the process of buying a GVI
Isoprome. Originally it was intended to be just for 2H of water, but
presently we are discussing the extension to 18O as well. And that
brings us into the CO buisiness. I did not realise these security
problems before, and the discussion brings me to some questions:

(1) Why would the CF use of the Isoprime (or the Finnigan equivalent)
use more CO than the dual inlet? After all it is just the short
reference pulse each time that uses the gas?
(2) How can you run a dual inlet system in combination with elemental
analyser  combustion/pyrolysis? Or do you just use the dual inlet
arrangement as a smart kind of reference gas injector?
(3) Did anyone try CO2 (with about 8% of CO+ formed in the source) or
even enriched N2 (with 15N15N added) as a substitute for CO?

regards,

Harro Meijer



--

Prof. dr. Harro A.J. Meijer
Centrum voor IsotopenOnderzoek (CIO), Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG  Groningen, Netherlands
tel +31-50-3634760   fax +31-50-3634738
http://www.rug.nl/cio

ATOM RSS1 RSS2