Analytische Chemie
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Vortrag (2)
- Zeitschriftenartikel (1)
Schlagworte
- VOC (3) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 4.2 Material-Mikrobiom Wechselwirkungen (3) (entfernen)
Eingeladener Vortrag
- nein (2)
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.
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.
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.