figshare
Browse
UAST_1513636_Supplementary file.docx (1.62 MB)

Aerosol size distribution measurement of electronic cigarette emissions using combined differential mobility and inertial impaction methods: Smoking machine and puff topography influence

Download (1.62 MB)
Version 2 2018-09-14, 21:09
Version 1 2018-08-20, 18:18
journal contribution
posted on 2018-09-14, 21:09 authored by Vladimir B. Mikheev, Alexander Ivanov, Eric A. Lucas, Patrick L. South, Hendrik O. Colijn, Pamela I. Clark

A combination of a real-time high resolution aerosol differential mobility spectrometer (DMS500) and an electrical low pressure impactor (used as a traditional impactor) was applied to simultaneously collect real-time data and analyze particle size by weighing the mass of the aerosol collected on the impactor stages. Nonrefillable fixed-power as well as refillable and power adjustable e-cigarettes (e-cigs) were tested at various puffing flow rates. Two types of smoking machines were used: a smoke cycle simulator that provides instantaneous straight sample delivery to the analyzer and a Human Profile Pump that utilizes two synchronized pistons and operates by sample pull–push mode. Chemical analysis of the major components of e-liquid (propylene glycol, vegetable glycerol, water, and nicotine) was made using a proton nuclear magnetic resonance method. Limited amounts of samples collected on impactor stages were analyzed by liquid chromatography time-of-flight mass-spectrometry to find newly formed semi- or low-volatile organic compounds in e-cig aerosol and by transmission electron microscopy to check for the presence of nanoparticles in e-cig emissions. Differential mobility and inertial impaction methods showed comparable particle size results. Method of aerosol generation (type of the smoking machine) as well as puffing topography affected the e-cig particle size. Newly formed semi- or low-volatile organic compounds as well as metal nanoparticles were found in e-cig aerosol.

Copyright © 2018 American Association for Aerosol Research

Funding

Research reported in this publication was supported by grant number P50CA180523 from the National Cancer Institute and FDA Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) awarded to the University of Maryland.

History