McClellan Study:
Snap Sampler returns the best comparisons...
The "McClellan Study" is a multi-agency test study conducted at the former McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento, California.
In the final report, Parsons describes the Snap Sampler as "...more consistently representative..."
Correlation Coefficients (R2) for the Snap Sampler were the highest of all the methods tested compared to low flow and standard purge methods.
For VOCs:
Low Flow vs. Snap Sampler R2=0.99
Low Flow vs. others...R2= 0.96, 0.91, 0.79, 0.77, 0.76
3 Volume vs Snap Sampler R2= 0.90
3 Volume vs. others...R2= 0.76, 0.75, 0.70, 0.58, 0.50, 0.33
For all Analytes:
Low Flow vs. Snap Sampler R2 = 0.99
3 Volume vs. Snap Sampler R2 = 0.99
|
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A close comparison makes technology conversion much easier:
Both are critically important.
Here is an example of a McClellan data plot:
Low Flow vs. Snap Sampler
|
In contrast, Hydrasleeve and PDB comparisons in the McClellan Study are not compelling...
|
Additionally, 3 volume purge sampling comparisons with the Hydrasleeve are not nearly as good as the Snap Sampler in the McClellan Study data.
|
More site comparisons are posted on the following page.
Go to the next data comparisons...
Army ESTCP
|
|
