Simultaneous on-line size and chemical analysis of gas phase and particulate phase of cigarette mainstream smoke
- 419 Downloads
- 33 Citations
Abstract
This paper describes the combined set-up of on-line chemical analysis of gas phase by single-photon ionisation/resonance enhanced multiphoton ionisation–time-of-flight mass spectrometry (SPI/REMPI-TOFMS) and on-line particle size analysis by differential electrical mobility particle spectrometry (DMS 500) for the investigation of fresh cigarette mainstream smoke. SPI is well suited for the investigation of a great variety of organic species, whereas REMPI is highly sensitive for aromatic compounds. Gas phase measurements of filtered and unfiltered smoke are possible with the SPI/REMPI-TOFMS in order to determine the influence of the presence of particles on the chemical composition of the gas phase. Initial results are shown for the characterisation and comparison of three pure Virginia tobacco research cigarettes having filter ventilations of 0%, i.e. no filter ventilation, 35% and 70% ventilation. The three cigarette types are smoked under two different smoking regimes, a standard regime using puff parameters equivalent to the conventional International Standard Organisation regime and a more intense smoking regime. For the gas phase, qualitative puff-by-puff resolved yields of three selected compounds (acetaldehyde, phenol and styrene) are shown and compared. For particulate matter, particle number, count median diameter and total surface area are illustrated on a puff-by-puff basis. Yields of the chemicals analysed, puff number and surface area are in good agreement with the intensity of the smoking regime and the dilution of smoke by filter ventilation. However, gaseous compounds are influenced differently, depending whether an absolute particle filter is present or not, i.e. they can be totally removed (phenol), partially removed (styrene) or not affected (acetaldehyde). For particle analysis, the count median diameter decreases from puff to puff and is strongly dependent on the smoking regime and ventilation rate. Thereby, 0% ventilated cigarettes smoked under the intense regime result in the smallest count median diameters of ca. 180 nm, whereas 70% ventilated cigarettes smoked with a standard regime lead to the largest values of up to 280 nm. As particle diameter increases, particle number decreases as a consequence of increasing time for particle coagulation.
Keywords
Photoionisation Electrical mobility particle spectrometry Cigarette smoke Tobacco smoke Gas phase Particulate phase Particle diameterReferences
- 1.Baker RR (1999) Smoke chemistry in tobacco: production, chemistry, and technology. Davis LD, Nielsen MT (eds.) Blackwell Science, Oxford, U. K.Google Scholar
- 2.Gaworski CL, Dozier MM, Eldridge SR, Morrissey R, Rajendran N, Gerhart JM (1998) Inhal Toxicol 10:857–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Norman V (1977) Rec. Adv Tob Sci 3:28–58Google Scholar
- 4.Holtzclaw J, Rose S, Wyatt J, Rounbehler D, Fine D (1984) Anal Chem 56:2952–2956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Baren RE, Parrish ME, Shafer KH, Harward CN, Shi Q, Nelson DD, MacManus JB, Zahniser MS (2004) Spectrochim Acta A 60:3437–3447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Vilcins G (1975) Beitr Tabakforsch Int 8(4):181–185Google Scholar
- 7.Ceschini P, Lafaye A (1976) Beitr Tabakforsch Int 8(6):378–381Google Scholar
- 8.Parrish ME, Lyons-Hart JL, Shafer KH (2001) Vib Spectrosc 27:29–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Li S, Banyasz JL, Parrish ME, Lyons-Hart J, Shafer KH (2002) J Anal Appl Pyrol 65:137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Parrish ME, Harward CN, Vilcins G (1986) Beitr Tabakforsch Int 13(4):169–181Google Scholar
- 11.Parrish ME, Harward CN (2000) Appl Spectrosc 54(11):1665–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Shi Q, Nelson DD, McManus JB, Zahniser MS, Parrish ME, Baren RE, Shafer KH, Harward CN (2003) Anal Chem 75:5180–5190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Plunkett S, Parrish ME, Shafer KH, Nelson D, Shorter J, Zahniser M (2001) Vib Spectrosc 27:53–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Plunkett S, Parrish ME, Shafer KH, Shorter JH, Nelson DD, Zahniser MS (2002) Spectrochim Acta A 58:2505–2517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Thomas CE, Koller KB (2001) Beitr Tabakforsch Int 19(7):345–351Google Scholar
- 16.Li S, Olegario RM, Banyasz JL, Shafer KH (2003) J Anal Appl Pyrol 66:156–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Wagner KA, Higby R, Stutt K (2005) Beitr Tabakforsch Int 21(5):273–279Google Scholar
- 18.Mitschke S, Adam T, Streibel T, Baker RR, Zimmermann R (2005) Anal Chem 77(8):2288–2296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Zimmermann R, Heger HJ, Kettrup A, Boesl U (1997) Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 11:1095–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Boesl U (2000) J Mass Spectrom 35:289–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Gittins CM, Castaldi MJ, Senkan SM, Rohlfing EA (1997) Anal Chem 69(3):286–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Oudejans L, Touati A, Gullett BK (2004) Anal Chem 76:2517–2524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.McEnally CS, Pfefferle LD, Mohammed RK, Smooke MD, Colket MB (1999) Anal Chem 71:364–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Shi YJ, Hu XK, Mao DM, Dimov SS, Lipson RH (1998) Anal Chem 70:4534–4539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Mühlberger F, Zimmermann R, Kettrup A (2001) Anal Chem 73(15):3590–3604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Adam T, Mitschke S, Streibel T, Baker RR, Zimmermann R (2006) Chem Res Toxicol 19:511–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Adam T, Mitschke S, Streibel T, Baker RR, Zimmermann R (2006) Anal Chim Acta 572:219–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Adam T, Baker RR, Zimmermann R (2007) Anal Bioanal Chem 387:575–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.British Standards Institution (2000) BS 5202-14:2000 ISO 4387:2000Google Scholar
- 30.Health Canada Tobacco Control Program (1999) Test Method T-115:1-5Google Scholar
- 31.Symonds JPR, Reavell KSJ, Olfert JS, Campbell BW, Swift SJ (2007) J Aerosol Sci 38:52–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Reavell K (2002) Proc Aeros Soc 121 - 124Google Scholar
- 33.Reavell K, Hands T, Collings N (2002) SAE Tech. Pap. 2002-01-2714Google Scholar
- 34.Norman A (1999) 11 B. Cigarette design and materials in Tobacco. Production, Chemistry and Technology Davis LD, Nielsen MT (eds.) Blackwell Science, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
- 35.Mühlberger F, Hafner K, Kaesdorf S, Ferge T, Zimmermann R (2004) Anal Chem 76(22):6753–6764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Streibel T, Hafner K, Mühlberger F, Adam T, Zimmermann R (2006) Appl Spectros 60:72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Hafner KM (2004) PhD thesis, Technische Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
- 38.Mitschke S (2007) PhD thesis, Technische Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
- 39.Mirme A, Noppel M, Piel I, Salm J, Tamm E, Tammet H (1984) Conference Proceeding: 11th international conference on atmospheric aerosols: 155-159Google Scholar
- 40.Baker RR (2002) Beitr Tabakforsch Int 20(1):23–41Google Scholar
- 41.Wartman WB Jr, Cogbill EC, Harlow ES (1959) Anal Chem 31:1705–1709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Dube MF, Green CR (1982) Rec Adv Tob Sci 8:42–102Google Scholar
- 43.Baker RR (1977) Combust Flame 30:21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.Baker RR, Robinson DP (1990) Rec Adv Tob Sci 16:3–101Google Scholar
- 45.Kalaitzoglou M, Samara C (2005) Beitr Tabakforsch Int 21(6):331–344Google Scholar
- 46.Kalaitzoglou M, Samara C (2006) Food Chem 44:1432–1442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.Baker RR, Dixon M (2006) Inhal Toxicol 18:255–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 48.Bernstein DM (2004) Inhal Toxicol 16:675–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.Anjilvel S, Asgharian B (1995) Fund Appl Toxicol 28:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 50.Pankow JF, 11 (2001) Chem Res Toxicol 14:1465–1481CrossRefGoogle Scholar