Chemische Charakterisierung und Spurenanalytik
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Vortrag (5)
- Zeitschriftenartikel (2)
Schlagworte
- VOC (7) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
Eingeladener Vortrag
- nein (5)
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by furniture and building materials can cause health issues. For an improvement of indoor air quality low emitting materials should be used. Quality assurance and –control (QA/QC) measures require an emission reference material (ERM) with a predictable emission rate of VOCs. The idea is to use porous materials as ERM, which store the VOCs inside their pores and emit them constantly.
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by furniture and
building materials can cause health issues. For an
improvement of indoor air quality low emitting materials
should be used. Quality assurance and –control (QA/QC)
measures require an emission reference material (ERM) with a
predictable emission rate of VOCs. The idea is to use porous
materials as ERM, which store the VOCs inside their pores and
emit them constantly.
In industrialised countries more than 80% of the time is spent indoors. Products, such as building materials and furniture, emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which are therefore ubiquitous in indoor air. VOC in combination may, under certain environmental and occupational conditions, result in reported sensory irritation and health complaints. Emission concentrations can become further elevated in new or refurbished buildings where the rate of air exchange with fresh ambient air may be limited due to improved energy saving aspects. A healthy indoor environment can be achieved by controlling the sources and by eliminating or limiting the release of harmful substances into the air. One way is to use (building) materials proved to be low emitting. Meanwhile, a worldwide network of professional commercial and non-commercial laboratories performing emission tests for the evaluation of products for interior use has been established. Therefore, comparability of test results must be ensured. A laboratory’s proficiency can be proven by internal and external validation measures that both include the application of suitable emission reference materials (ERM). For the emission test chamber procedure according to EN 16516, no artificial ERM is commercially available. The EU-funded EMPIR project MetrIAQ aims to fill this gap by developing new and improved ERMs. The goal is to obtain a material with a reproducible and temporally constant compound release (less than 10 % variability over 14 days). Two approaches were tested: the impregnation of porous materials with VOC, and the encapsulation of VOC in polymer microcapsules. Impregnation is performed with help of an autoclave and supercritical CO2. The encapsulation is done by interfacial polymerisation on VOC droplets. For both approaches, synthesis and/or material parameters were varied to obtain an optimal ERM. Findings about the optimisation of ERM generation, as well as performance of the best emission reference materials, will be presented.
Die passive Probenahme von VOC (Volatile Organic Compounds) mit Tenax® TA und Thermodesorption GC/MS Analytik ist eine einfache, kosteneffiziente und repräsentative Methode zur Bestimmung der VOC-Konzentrationen in der Innenraumluft. In der Theorie ist die Stoffaufnahme in den Passivsammler nur abhängig vom Diffusionskoeffizienten der Substanz in Luft und der Geometrie des Sammlers (ideale Adsorption). Um sie zu charakterisieren, wird die Aufnahmerate (UR), definiert als Quotient der Massenaufnahme und dem Produkt aus Konzentration und Expositionszeit, verwendet. Viele effektive Aufnahmeraten (UR,eff) unterscheiden sich beträchtlich von idealen (theoretischen) Werten (UR,id). Literaturwerte sind in nationalen und internationalen Normen lediglich für bestimmte Expositionszeiten vorgegeben, während detaillierte Informationen über den zugehörigen Konzentrationsbereich fehlen. Außerdem ist die Anzahl der insgesamt in der Literatur beschriebenen Substanzen begrenzt. Das Ziel der vorgestellten Studie ist es diesen Fundus an Aufnahmeraten zu begutachten und zu prüfen und ihn durch die Bestimmung eigener qualitätsgesicherter Laborwerte zu ergänzen. Die bestimmten Aufnahmeraten werden als akkurat bezüglich ihrer relativen Standardabweichung und Vergleichbarkeit zu Literaturwerten betrachtet und können für Expositionszeiten von 7 Tagen bei Konzentrationen von 50 100 µg/m³ (ca. 100 300 ppm min) empfohlen werden. Die Sieben Tage Aufnahmeraten aus ISO16017 2 und ASTM D6196 sind nicht generell für diesen Zweck geeignet, wie exemplarisch für Benzol gezeigt wurde.
The ISO 16000-6 standard describes a method for the determination of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in indoor and test chamber air by sorbent-based active sampling, thermal desorption and gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC/MS). It also gives directions to adapt this methodology to very volatile organic compounds (VVOCs). Indeed, toxicologically based guideline values are being implemented for these compounds and it becomes necessary to measure them. But a comprehensive and robust measurement method is lacking. This work highlights the points that still need to be explored towards the standardisation of a suitable procedure: investigations on sorbent combinations, the suitability of chromatography columns and the use of gaseous standards are required. The biggest challenge remains in the fact that strong sorbents adsorb water together with VVOCs. Water may impair the analysis and the optimal approach to eliminate it is still to be found and integrated into the sampling strategy.
In recent years numerous reports have highlighted the options of chemical breath analysis with regard to noninvasive cancer detection. Certain volatile organic compounds (VOC) supposedly present in higher amounts or in characteristic patterns have been suggested as potential biomarkers. However, so far no clinical application based on a specific set of compounds appears to exist. Numerous reports on the capability of sniffer dogs and sensor arrays or electronic noses to distinguish breath of cancer patients and healthy controls supports the concept of genuine cancer-related volatile profiles. However, the actual compounds responsible for the scent are completely unknown and there is no correlation with the potential biomarkers suggested on basis of chemical trace analysis.
It is outlined that specific features connected with the VOC analysis in breath – namely small concentrations of volatiles, interfering background concentrations, considerable sampling effort and sample instability, impracticability regarding routine application - stand in the way of substantial progress. The underlying chemicalanalytical challenge can only be met considering the severe susceptibility of VOC determination to these adverse conditions.
Therefore, the attention is drawn to the needs for appropriate quality assurance/quality control as the most important feature for the reliable quantification of volatiles present in trace concentration. Consequently, the advantages of urine as an alternative matrix for volatile biomarker search in the context of diagnosing lung and other cancers are outlined with specific focus on quality assurance and practicability in clinical chemistry. The headspace over urine samples as the VOC source allows adapting gas chromatographical procedures well-established in water analysis. Foremost, the selection of urine over breath as non-invasive matrix should provide considerably more resilience to adverse effects during sampling and analysis. The most important advantage of urine over breath is seen in the option to partition, dispense, mix, spike, store, and thus to dispatch taylor-made urine samples on demand for quality control measures. Although it is still open at this point if cancer diagnosis supported by non-invasively sampled VOC profiles will ultimately reach clinical application the advantages of urine over breath should significantly facilitate urgently required steps beyond the current proof-of-concept stage and towards standardisation.
Summary: A screening test for potential emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) was run on different thermoplastic filaments used for 3D printing. The method of direct thermal desorption was used to simulate the high temperatures during the 3D printing process and to identify the main compounds emitted from the filaments. A large number of unexpected compounds were detected that might affect the user’s health and have an impact on indoor air chemistry.
Introduction: The use of desktop 3D printers is increasing. Compared to other devices with known emissions, e.g. laser printers, there is still a lack of information on possible emissions of VOC and ultrafine particles during operation and the effect on indoor air quality. Most of the commercially available desktop 3D printers operate with a molten polymer deposition. For this process a solid thermoplastic filament is heated in an extrusion nozzle. Most filaments for desktop 3D printers use either acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) or polylactic acid (PLA) as filament. Alternatives are polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) or polycarbonate (PC).
Method: Eight different thermoplastic filaments for 3D printers were analysed by direct thermal desorption followed by GC-MS identification of the emitted substances. Direct thermal desorption was done by desorbing 5 mg of the feedstock for 1 minute at a temperature of 210°C. This is an average temperature for 3D printing with thermoplastic filaments.
Results and conclusions: The comparison of the 4 different filament groups showed the highest overall emissions from ABS, followed by PLA, PC and PVA. Filament ABS 2 emitted mainly SVOCs and triphenyl phosphate, the latter has the highest emission for a single compound from all evaluated filaments.
Thermoplastic filaments are a new source of VOC emissions due to the high temperatures associated with 3D printing, which can reach up to 270°C. Some of the detected compounds like lactic acid, lactide and bisphenol A have never been described before in the indoor environment. Additionally some of the main substances could not be identified and some others might have the potential to affect the indoor air chemistry.
The appearance of some newly detected compounds raises concerns about potential health effects for the users of 3D printers at home.