• Analytical Science and Technology
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.91-101
• /
• 2012

A list of volatile fatty acids (VFA) including propionic acid, butyric acid, isovaleric acid, valeric acid, etc. is well known for offensive odorants. The analysis of odorant VFA is a highly delicate task due to high reactivity and unstable recovery rate. At present, analytical methods of VFA are recommended to include alkali impregnation filter method and alkali absorption method by the malodor prevention law of the Korea Ministry of Environment (KMOE). In this review, a survey has been made to explore various approaches available for the analysis of VFA to include both official methods of the KMOE and others. In light of the unreliability of those established analytical methods, it is highly desirable to develop some substituting methods for VFA. Among such options, one may consider such option as sorbent tube (ST) sampling and cryogenic trapping-thermal desorption technique. Moreover, procedures used for standard preparation, sampling steps, and instrumental detection stage are also evaluated. Application of container sampling (like Tedlar bag) is however not recommendable due to significant (sorptive) loss in sampling and in storage stage. In the detection stage, the use of GC/MS is recommendable to replace GC/FID due to the presence of diverse interfering substances. Thus, it is essential to properly establish the basic quality assurance (QA) for VFA analysis in air.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.200-208
• /
• 2012

Objectives: This study investigated the performance of three separate units of a portable photoionization detector (PID, ppb-RAE 3000) for measuring volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in a laboratory. Methods: A laboratory evaluation of the accuracy, precision, and inter-instrumental variance of three separate units of a portable PID (ppb-RAE 3000) was performed. The evaluation was based on the preparation of a test air sample of known toluene or ethylacetate concentration in a Tedlar$^{(R)}$ bag. The test air sample was monitored and data were logged consecutively by the three PIDs. A certified gas of 50 ppm toluene was also monitored during the test to ensure the reliability of the generated test air sample. Four different concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 2 TLV were used and a series of five measurements for each concentration level was performed. The accuracy was evaluated using National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) criteria. Results: The results from the oldest ppb-RAE3000 unit among the three test units generally fell outside the NIOSH recommended accuracy criteria of ${\pm}25%$, whereas the other two units produced results which were acceptable at, or greater than, 25 ppm of toluene, or 0.5 TLV. These units also met the NIOSH criteria for some ethylacetate measurements but the results were not consistent. Conclusions: Considering the inconsistent performance of these ppb-RAE 3000 units, this device may not be appropriate for use as an alternative to the standard measurement methods. However, it can serve good survey instruments to identify exposure sources or concentration profiles. For all applications, the ppb-RAE 3000 should be used with frequent calibration checks, additional validation using a reference material, and careful maintenance.