Batterman Stuart, Metts Tricia, Kalliokoski Pentti
The University of Michigan, 109 Observatory Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2029, USA.
J Environ Monit. 2002 Dec;4(6):870-8. doi: 10.1039/b204835c.
Low flow active sampling techniques collecting vapors and gases using thermally desorbable adsorbents are now feasible and desirable in many applications as they permit long integration times, the potential for miniaturized sampling configurations, and other advantages. At very low air flow rates (< 1 ml min(-1)), diffusive uptake on adsorbents in conventional sorbent tubes may equal or exceed the active (pumped) uptake rate, and even at low flow rates (1-4 ml min(-1)), diffusive uptake may significantly bias measurements. Thus, corrections to account for the diffusive flux or means to limit the diffusive uptake are needed in low flow applications. This paper presents (1) a theoretical analysis of the role of diffusive and advective uptake for several sampling geometries of tube-type samplers; (2) experimental confirmation using both laboratory and field studies; (3) estimates of the tortuosity and porosity of the glass wool packing used to retain the adsorbent, parameters needed to estimate diffusive fluxes in passive and active sampling; (4) a demonstration that orifice-equipped low flow active samplers can reduce diffusive uptake and improve precision, and (5) a model predicting the saturated adsorbent layer that helps to account for the gradual decline in uptake rates seen in passive sampling. Diffusive uptake will depend on the tube configuration and diffusion coefficient of the substance of interest, but for conventional sampling tubes (0.4-0.5 cm id, 1.5 cm air gap), sample flow rates should be maintained above 1 to 4 ml min(-1) to keep errors below 5%. Laboratory experiments showed close agreement with theoretical calculations, and the field study using 1 to 4 d sampling periods and 0.3 ml min(-1) flows demonstrated that the orifice-equipped samplers essentially eliminated diffusive uptake. No significant practical difficulties are encountered using orifices, e.g., pressure drop is minimal. Experimental estimates of tortuosity (0.79 +/- 0.02) and porosity (0.92 +/- 0.10) of the glass wool packing (0.3 cm length) represent relatively little resistance to diffusion; however, variation in the packing and adsorbent placement can degrade the precision achievable by passive samplers. Diffusion barriers, consisting most simply of an orifice, may be used to lower the diffusive uptake. A needle-type orifice permits flows below 0.1 ml min(-1) and is suitable for sampling periods as long as several weeks, and it provided greater precision than conventional open-ended sampling tubes (8% compared to 13%). Finally, the gradual decrease in diffusive fluxes often seen in passive sampling is attributed to additional resistance posed by a saturated adsorbent layer, in agreement with a simple model based on total VOCs and specific adsorptivity of the adsorbent.
使用可热解吸吸附剂收集蒸汽和气体的低流量主动采样技术,在许多应用中现在是可行且理想的,因为它们允许较长的积分时间、具有小型化采样配置的潜力以及其他优点。在极低的空气流速(<1毫升/分钟)下,传统吸附剂管中吸附剂上的扩散吸收可能等于或超过主动(泵送)吸收速率,甚至在低流速(1 - 4毫升/分钟)下,扩散吸收也可能显著影响测量结果。因此,在低流量应用中需要对扩散通量进行校正或采取措施限制扩散吸收。本文介绍了:(1)对几种管型采样器采样几何形状的扩散和对流吸收作用的理论分析;(2)使用实验室和现场研究的实验验证;(3)用于保留吸附剂的玻璃棉填料的曲折度和孔隙率估计,这是估计被动和主动采样中扩散通量所需的参数;(4)证明配备孔板的低流量主动采样器可以减少扩散吸收并提高精度;(5)一个预测饱和吸附剂层的模型,有助于解释被动采样中吸收速率的逐渐下降。扩散吸收将取决于管的配置和目标物质的扩散系数,但对于传统采样管(内径0.4 - 0.5厘米,气隙1.5厘米),样品流速应保持在1至4毫升/分钟以上,以使误差低于5%。实验室实验表明与理论计算结果非常吻合,现场研究使用1至4天的采样周期和0.3毫升/分钟的流速,结果表明配备孔板的采样器基本上消除了扩散吸收。使用孔板不会遇到重大实际困难,例如压降最小。玻璃棉填料(0.3厘米长)的曲折度(0.79 ± 0.02)和孔隙率(0.92 ± 0.10)的实验估计表明其对扩散的阻力相对较小;然而,填料和吸附剂放置的变化会降低被动采样可达到的精度。扩散屏障最简单的形式是孔板,可用于降低扩散吸收。针型孔板允许流速低于0.1毫升/分钟,适用于长达数周的采样周期,并且它提供了比传统开口采样管更高的精度(分别为8%和13%)。最后,被动采样中经常看到的扩散通量逐渐下降归因于饱和吸附剂层带来的额外阻力,这与基于总挥发性有机化合物和吸附剂比吸附性的简单模型一致。