Heal Mathew R
School of Chemistry, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, UK EH9 3JJ.
J Environ Monit. 2008 Nov;10(11):1363-9. doi: 10.1039/b811230d. Epub 2008 Oct 1.
A few studies have suggested that the precision and accuracy of measurement of NO(2) by Palmes-type passive diffusion tube (PDT) are affected by the method of preparation of the triethanolamine (TEA) absorbent coating on the grids. Theses studies have been quite limited in extent and have tended to evaluate PDT accuracy as zero bias between PDT NO(2) value and the exposure-averaged NO(2) determined by co-located chemiluminescence analyser. This ignores the well-documented intrinsic systematic biases on PDT-derived NO(2), such as within-tube chemistry and exposure-duration nitrite loss, which may lead to non-zero bias values irrespective of effects of TEA absorbent preparation method on PDT accuracy. This paper reports on a statistical analysis of a large dataset comprising 680 duplicated PDT exposures spanning 146 separate exposure periods, spread over five urban exposure locations and a number of years. In each exposure period, PDTs prepared by between four and six different grid preparation methods were simultaneously compared. The preparation methods used combinations of the following: acetone or water as the TEA solvent; 20% or 50% as %TEA in the solution; and application of TEA solution by dipping grids for several minutes in the solution before drying and tube assembly, or by pipetting 50 microL of solution directly onto grids already placed in the PDT cap. These represent the range of preparation procedures typically used. Accuracy was evaluated as maximised nitrite capture within an exposure. Data were analysed by general linear modelling including examination of interaction between different aspects of grid preparation method. PDT precision and accuracy were both significantly better, on average, when the PDT grids were prepared by dipping in TEA solution, and neither solvent or %TEA used for the dipping solution were important. Where PDT preparation by pipetting TEA solution onto grids is to be used, better performance was obtained using 20% TEA in water. A systematic positive bias in PDT measure of NO(2), consistent with within-tube oxidation of NO to NO(2) and independent of preparation method, was again evident in this work.
一些研究表明,帕尔姆斯型被动扩散管(PDT)对二氧化氮(NO₂)的测量精度和准确性受网格上三乙醇胺(TEA)吸收涂层制备方法的影响。这些研究在范围上相当有限,并且倾向于将PDT准确性评估为PDT NO₂值与通过并置化学发光分析仪测定的暴露平均NO₂之间的零偏差。这忽略了关于PDT衍生的NO₂的充分记录的内在系统偏差,例如管内化学过程和暴露持续时间内亚硝酸盐损失,这可能导致非零偏差值,而与TEA吸收剂制备方法对PDT准确性的影响无关。本文报告了对一个大型数据集的统计分析,该数据集包含680次重复的PDT暴露,跨越146个单独的暴露期,分布在五个城市暴露地点且历经数年。在每个暴露期,同时比较了由四到六种不同网格制备方法制备的PDT。所使用的制备方法组合如下:以丙酮或水作为TEA溶剂;溶液中TEA的含量为20%或50%;通过将网格在溶液中浸泡几分钟然后干燥并组装管子来施加TEA溶液,或者通过将50微升溶液直接移液到已放置在PDT帽中的网格上。这些代表了通常使用的制备程序范围。准确性评估为暴露期间亚硝酸盐捕获最大化。通过一般线性模型分析数据,包括检查网格制备方法不同方面之间的相互作用。平均而言,当通过将PDT网格浸泡在TEA溶液中来制备时,PDT的精度和准确性都显著更好,并且用于浸泡溶液的溶剂或TEA含量都不重要。如果要使用将TEA溶液移液到网格上的方法来制备PDT,使用20% TEA的水溶液可获得更好的性能。在这项工作中再次明显观察到,PDT对NO₂的测量存在系统性正偏差,这与管内NO氧化为NO₂一致且与制备方法无关。