-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:58 am
Hi all!
In my laboratory, I'm "developing" the HPLC/UV method for the determination of Formaldehyde in textile and leather by derivatization with 2,4-DNPH. At present we are using the UV determination with Acetonitrile derivatization.
My problem is that while the leather's analysis are comparable with both methods, the textile's analysis gives large discrepancy and an extra-determination (in the hypotesis that the Nash method gives the correct evaluation) of formaldhehyde with the HPLC method (10 to 20 times).
Does anyone have an idea of the reason of that discrepancy?
Thanks!
In my laboratory, I'm "developing" the HPLC/UV method for the determination of Formaldehyde in textile and leather by derivatization with 2,4-DNPH. At present we are using the UV determination with Acetonitrile derivatization.
My problem is that while the leather's analysis are comparable with both methods, the textile's analysis gives large discrepancy and an extra-determination (in the hypotesis that the Nash method gives the correct evaluation) of formaldhehyde with the HPLC method (10 to 20 times).
Does anyone have an idea of the reason of that discrepancy?
Thanks!
