• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.261-269
• /
• 2005

To investigate the field applicability of a diffusive sampler (3M OVM #3500, passive sampling method) authors conducted a simultaneous measurement of personal organic solvents exposure in the air of the workplaces by charcoal tube with low volume sampler (active sampling method) and diffusive sampler. Samples were collected and analyzed by NIOSH method ($NMAM^{(R)}$) from thirty-eight workers in 12 factories who work in 6 different processes. Geometric mean (GM) and geometric standard deviation (GSD) were used to describe the result. To compare the results of the two methods, paired t-test was used. According to the manual of the exposure assessment of the mixed organic solvents (Ministry of Labor, Korea), Em was calculated. Simple linear regression was used to evaluate the relationship between the two methods. Results were as follows; 1. Eight different solvents (ethyl acetate, n-hexane, toluene, xylene, acetone, isopropyl alcohol, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), and methyl isobutyl ketone) were detected simultaneously in the two methods and the concentrations of the personal exposure were lower than 0.5 TLV level. The concentration of the charcoal tube method was higher than that of a diffusive sampler in n-hexane and MEK (p<0.05). 2. Em of the charcoal tube method was higher than that of diffusive sampler method but not significantly different and was lower than the OEL (Occupational Exposure Limit) in all 6 processes. 3. There was a significant correlation between the two methods in low concentrations of the 8 organic solvents (p<0.05). In conclusion, there was no difference in charcoal tube method and diffusive sampler method in low concentrations of some organic solvents, diffusive sampler can be applied to assess the personal monitoring in low level exposure.

• Analytical Science and Technology
• /
• v.22 no.6
• /
• pp.488-497
• /
• 2009

In this study, analytical methodology for several organic fatty acids (OFA: propionic acid (PA), butyric acid (BA), isovaleric acid (IA), and valeric acid (VA)) designated as new offensive odorants in Korea (as of year 2010) was investigated along with some odorous VOCs (styrene, toluene, xylene, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, butyl acetate, and isobutyl alcohol). For this purpose, working standards (WS) containing all of these 13 compounds were loaded into adsorption tube filled with Tenax TA, and analyzed by gas chromatography (GC) system thermal desorber interfaced with. The analytical sensitivities of organic fatty acids expressed in terms of detection limit (both in absolute mass (ng) and concentration (ppb)) were lower by 1.5-2 times than other compounds (PA: 0.24 ng (0.16 ppb), BA: 0.19 ng (0.11 ppb), IA: 0.15 ng (0.07 ppb), and VA: 0.28 ng (0.13 ppb)). The precision of BA, IA, and VA, if assessed in terms of relative standard error (RSE), maintained above 5%, while the precison of other compounds were below 5%. The reproducibility of analysis improved with the aid of internal standard calibration (PA: $1.1{\pm}0.4%$, BA: $10{\pm}0.46$, IA; $12{\pm}0.3%$, VA: $4{\pm}0.1%$), respectively. The results of this study showed that organic fatty acid can be analyzed using adsorption tube and thermal desorber in a more reliable way to replace alkali absorption method introduced in the odor prevention law of the Korea Ministry of Environment (KMOE).

• Food Science and Preservation
• /
• v.17 no.5
• /
• pp.733-740
• /
• 2010

Brown rice vinegars were prepared by agitated or static acetic acid fermentation using different yeast strains (Saccharomyces kluyveri DJ97, Saccharomyces cerevisiae JK99, Saccharomyces cerevisiae GRJ, or Saccharomyces cerevisiae H9). Organic acid contents and levels of volatile compounds were compared in vinegars prepared by different methods. The chosen yeast strain did not significantly affect the organic acid content of vinegar. In vinegars prepared by agitated acetic acid fermentation, organic acid contents were, in the order of descending abundance, acetic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, oxalic acid, and tartaric acid. In vinegars prepared by static acetic acid fermentation, no citric acid was detected, and lactic acid content was higher than that in agitated acetic acid fermented vinegar. The volatile compounds of both vinegars, analyzed by GC-MS, did not significantly differ when various yeast strains were used. Eighteen volatile compounds were detected in vinegar prepared by agitated acetic acid fermentation and 11 in vinegar prepared by static fermentation. Volatile compounds that can affect vinegar quality, including ethyl acetate and phenethyl acetate, were present at high concentrations in static acetic acid fermented vinegar. Electronic nose analysis showed that volatile chemical patterns differed between the two types of vinegar, but there were no significant differences in sensory scores between vinegars prepared using various yeast strains or by either of the two methods of fermentation.

• Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Scientists of Korea
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.219-227
• /
• 2015

This study was conducted to determine 10 preservatives (benzyl alcohol (BAl), phenoxyethanol (PE), benzoic acid (BA), sorbic acid (SA), methyl paraben (MP), ethyl paraben (EP), propyl paraben (PP), isopropyl paraben (IPP), butyl paraben (BP), isobutyl paraben (IBP)) levels in 125 cosmetics (n = 125) for children by the simultaneous analysis of HPLC. The detection ranges were as follows; 0.01 ~ 0.91% (n = 35) for PE, 0.01 ~ 0.48% (n = 28) for BA, 0.01 ~ 0.78% (n = 9) for BAl, 0.01 ~ 0.11% (n = 3) for SA, 0.04 ~ 0.21% (n = 8) for MP, 0.02 ~ 0.09% (n = 8) for PP, and 0.04% (n = 1) for EP. The order of detection rates was cleanser (63%) > cream (48%) > sunscreen (46%) > lotion (38%) > oil (13%). At least one of target preservatives was contained in 50% (63/125) of samples and the content of the detected preservatives was within maximum allowed amount established by KFDA. Phenoxyethanol and benzoic acid were used more frequently than paraoxybenzoate esters (parabens) in cosmetics for children and the detected parabens was mainly the mixture of methyl paraben and propyl paraben.