碳酸盐岩有机质丰度测试新方法

发布时间：2018-04-25 03:10

本文选题：碳酸盐岩 + 有机质丰度　；参考：《沉积学报》2016年01期

【摘要】：常规有机碳测试中仅对残余固相进行测试而忽略了酸解液,而前人研究证实酸解液中含有一定量的有机质。为了准确定量碳酸盐岩样品的总有机碳(TOC),提出蒙脱石增稠元素分析的新方法。本次研究以配比标样(CaCO_3+SiO_2+有机质标样)作为研究对象,对配比标样进行传统有机碳测试以及酸解后利用蒙脱石增稠进行元素分析的新方法测试。结果显示加入有机质标样为小分子有机酸(盐)的配比标样的传统有机碳测试的相对误差为98.5%~99.6%,加入大分子有机质的配比标样传统有机碳测试的相对误差较小,为11.9%~48.1%。而酸解后蒙脱石增稠进行元素分析测试的方法中,总有机碳(TOC)的相对误差为0.76%~19.46%。不同有机碳浓度的配比标样的元素分析法测试结果的相对误差随着有机碳浓度的增大而减小。新有机碳测试方法中,由于除去无机碳后将残渣与酸解液混合均匀并增稠,避免了有机碳的流失,更能客观反映样品总有机碳(TOC)。
[Abstract]:In the conventional organic carbon test, only residual solid phase is tested, but the acidolysis solution is neglected. However, previous studies have confirmed that there is a certain amount of organic matter in the acid solution. In order to accurately quantify the total organic carbon of carbonate rock samples, a new method for the analysis of thickening elements of montmorillonite is proposed. In this study, the standard sample of Caco _ S _ 3 SiO_2 organic matter was used as the research object. The standard sample was tested by traditional organic carbon test and a new method of elemental analysis using montmorillonite thickening after acidolysis. The results showed that the relative error of traditional organic carbon test was 98.5 and 99.6 for organic matter standard sample with small molecular organic acid (salt). The relative error of traditional organic carbon test for adding macromolecular organic matter standard sample was relatively small, which was 11.9% and 48.1% respectively. The relative error of total organic carbon (TOC) in the method of elemental analysis of montmorillonite thickening after acidolysis is 0.76 and 19.46. The relative error of elemental analysis method for different organic carbon concentrations decreased with the increase of organic carbon concentration. In the new organic carbon testing method, the residue and acid solution are mixed evenly and thickened after the removal of inorganic carbon, which avoids the loss of organic carbon and can reflect the total organic carbon of the sample more objectively.
【作者单位】：甘肃省油气资源研究重点实验室/中国科学院油气资源研究重点实验室;中国科学院大学;
【基金】：西部之光重点项目国家重点基础研究发展计划(973计划)(2012CB214801) 甘肃省重点实验室专项(1309RTSA041)联合资助~~
【分类号】：P618.13

【相似文献】