Journal of Korean Society for Atmospheric Environment (한국대기환경학회지)

Korean Society for Atmospheric Environment (한국대기환경학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Preliminary Study on Polyester Aluminum Bag as the Possible Substitute for Tedlar Bag Sampler in RSC Analysis

테들러 백 샘플러의 대체 소재로서 폴리에스터 알루미늄 백에 대한 예비연구: 환원황화합물을 중심으로

  • Kim, Ki-Hyun (Department of Environment & Energy, Sejong University) ;
  • Jo, Sang-Hee (Department of Environment & Energy, Sejong University)
  • 김기현 (세종대학교 지구환경과학과) ;
  • 조상희 (세종대학교 지구환경과학과)
  • Received : 2011.06.12
  • Accepted : 2011.07.26
  • Published : 2011.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, the recovery rate of Tedlar bag (T) sampler was investigated in comparison to polyester aluminum bag (P) sampler. To derive the comparative data sets for the relative performance between different samplers, a series of calibration experiments were performed by using 1 ppb standard of four offensive reduced sulfur compounds (RSC) odorants ($H_2S$, $CH_3SH$, DMS, and DMDS) along with $SO_2$ and $CS_2$. All the analysis was made by gas chromatography/pulsed flame photometric detector (GC/PFPD) combined with air server/thermal desorber (AS/TD). The measurement data were obtained by loading gaseous standards (1 ppb) at 3 injection volumes (250, 500 and 1,000 mL) at three intervals (0, 24 and 72 hrs). The recovery rates (RR) of P sampler were computed against the slope values of T sampler. According to our analysis, P sampler exhibits slightly enhanced loss relative to T, especially with light RSCs ($H_2S$ and $CH_3SH$). At day 0, RR for the two were 88 and 85%, respectively. Such reduction proceeded rather rapidly in the case of $H_2S$ through time. However, P sampler was more stable to store $SO_2$ unlike others. Despite slightly reduced recovery, P sampler appears as a good replacement of T sampler.

Keywords

References

  1. Jo, H.-J. and K.-H. Kim (2011) Storage stability of reduced sulfur gases in Tedlar bag sampler: Test of two different storing approaches, Analytical Science & Technology, In press. (in Korean with English abstract) https://doi.org/10.5806/AST.2011.24.3.212
  2. Jo, H.-J., Z.-H. Shon, O.-F. Hong, and K.-H. Kim (2011) Temporal variability of reduced sulfur compounds (RSC) collected in Tedlar bag: Simulation of sample stability in the emission sources, J. Korean Soc. Atrnos. Environ., In press. (in Korean with English abstract) https://doi.org/10.5572/KOSAE.2011.27.3.281
  3. Kim, K.-H. (2005) Some insights into the gas chromatographic determination of reduced sulfur compounds (RSC) in air, Environ. Sci. & Technol., 39(17), 6765-6769. https://doi.org/10.1021/es050497i
  4. Kim, K.-H., D.-W. Ju, and S.-W. Joo (2005) The evaluation of recovery rate associated with the use of thermal desorption system for the analysis of atmospheric reduced sulfur compounds (RSC) using the GC/PFPD method, Talanta, 67, 955-959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2005.04.048
  5. Kim, K.-H., J.-W. Ahn, Y.-J. Choi, and H.T. Nguyen (2006) The loss patterns of reduced sulfur compounds in contact with different tubing materials, Journal of Chromatography A, 1132, 228-233.
  6. Ochiai, N., T. Masahiko, S. Daishima, and D.B. Cardin (2001) Analysis of volatile sulphur compounds in breath by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry usng a three-stage cryogenic trapping preconcentration system, J. Chromatog. B, 762, 67-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4347(01)00343-7
  7. Pandey, S.K. and K.-H. Kim (2009) A review of methods for the determination of reduced sulfur compounds (RSCs) in air, Environ. Sci. & Tech., 29, 3020-3029.
  8. Rafson, H. (1998) Odor and VOC control hand book, McCraw-Hill professional, 4, 16-31.
  9. Scobbie, E. and J.A. Groves (1998) Determination of diemethyl sulphate and diethyl sulphate in air by thermal desorption gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, British occupational hygiene society, Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
  10. Trabue, S., K. Scoggin, F. Mitloehner, H. Li, R. Burns, and H. Xin (2008) Field sampling method for quantifying volatile sulfur compounds from animal feeding operations, Atmos. Environ., 42, 3332-3341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.03.016