Abstract
Some commercially available portable on-site detection equipment (detection paper, gas detection tube, ion mobility spectrometer, surface acoustic wavelength detector, flame photometric detector, gas chromatograph–mass spectrometer) were evaluated using authentic vaporized chemical-warfare agents, from the standpoint of their qualitative detection characteristics, detection limits, response time, frequency of false alarms and residubility on the devices. False alarms and the strong adsorption of agents by the devices are typical drawbacks of such equipment.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
