4.5 Article

Sampling Artifacts from Conductive Silicone Tubing

期刊

AEROSOL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 43, 期 9, 页码 855-865

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/02786820902984811

关键词

-

资金

  1. NASA
  2. U.S. Department of Energy [DE AC02-05CH11231]
  3. Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation
  4. [NRA NNC07CB57C]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report evidence that carbon impregnated conductive silicone tubing used in aerosol sampling systems can introduce two types of experimental artifacts: (1) silicon tubing dynamically absorbs carbon dioxide gas, requiring greater than 5 minutes to reach equilibrium and (2) silicone tubing emits organic contaminants containing siloxane that are adsorbed onto particles traveling through it and onto downstream quartz fiber filters. The consequence can be substantial for engine exhaust measurements as both artifacts directly impact calculations of particulate mass-based emission indices. The emission of contaminants from the silicone tubing can result in overestimation of organic particle mass concentrations based on real-time aerosol mass spectrometry and the off-line thermal analysis of quartz filters. The adsorption of siloxane contaminants can affect the surface properties of aerosol particles; we observed a marked reduction in the water-affinity of soot particles passed through conductive silicone tubing. These combined observations suggest that the silicone tubing artifacts may have wide consequence for the aerosol community and the tubing should, therefore, be used with caution. Contamination associated with the use of silicone tubing was observed at ambient temperature and, in some cases, was enhanced by mild heating (<70 degrees C) or pre-exposure to a solvent (methanol). Further evaluation is warranted to quantify systematically how the contamination responds to variations in system temperature, physicochemical particle properties, exposure to solvent, sample contact time, tubing age, and sample flow rates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据