Datei für die Öffentlichkeit verfügbar ("Open Access")
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (2) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (2)
Referierte Publikation
- ja (2)
Schlagworte
- Acetic acid (1)
- Air sampling (1)
- DNPH (1)
- EN 717-3 (1)
- Emission test chamber (1)
- Flask method (1)
- Formaldehyde (1)
- Formic acid (1)
- Microchamber (1)
- VVOCs (1)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
Paper des Monats
- ja (1)
Formaldehyde is considered as carcinogenic and is emitted from particleboards and plywood used in toy manufacturing. Currently, the flask method is frequently used in Europe for market surveillance purposes to assess formaldehyde release from toys, but its concordance to Levels measured in emission test chambers is poor. Surveillance laboratories are unable to afford laborious and expensive emission chamber testing to comply with a new amendment of the European Toy Directive; they need an alternative method that can provide reliable results. Therefore, the application of miniaturised emission test chambers was tested. Comparisons between a 1 m3 emission test chamber and 44 mL microchambers with two particleboards over 28 days and between a 24 L desiccator chamber and the microchambers with three puzzle samples over 10 days resulted in a correlation coefficient r2 of 0.834 for formaldehyde at steady state. The correlation between the results obtained in microchambers vs. flask showed a high variability over 10 samples (r2: 0.145),
thereby demonstrating the error-proneness of the flask method in comparison to methods carried out under ambient parameters. An exposure assessment was also performed for three toy puzzles: indoor formaldehyde concentrations caused by puzzles were not negligible (up to 8 µg/m3), especially when more conservative exposure scenarios were considered.
Several construction and building materials, including wood, glue and coatings, are possible sources of very volatile organic compounds (VVOCs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) like formic and acetic acid. Due to very high air tightness and very low air exchange rates in new buildings concentrations of these harmful substances can increase considerably. To minimize the risk, emissions from building products should be identified and quantified. With the common standard method, this means Tenax® sampling followed by thermal desorption and GC-MS analysis, these acids could not be detected sufficiently. The aim oft this study is the comparison of two different methods for the determination of acetic and formic acid. The sampling of method one, which is usually used for identification and quantification of VOCs, is done in accordance with ISO 16000-6 and ISO 16017-1 on Carbotrap® 202 multi-bed thermal desorption tube by subsequent identification and quantification with GC-MS. Method two is based on sampling on 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) cartridges, derivatisation, elution, identification and quantification of the derivatives with LC-MS/MS (liquid chromatography mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry).