Quantitative passive soil vapor sampling for VOCs- part 2: laboratory experiments

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMcAlary, Todd
dc.contributor.authorGroenevelt, Hester
dc.contributor.authorSeethapathy, Suresh
dc.contributor.authorSacco, Paolo
dc.contributor.authorCrump, Derrick
dc.contributor.authorTuday, Michael
dc.contributor.authorSchumacher, Brian
dc.contributor.authorHayes, Heidi
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Paul
dc.contributor.authorGorecki, Tadeusz
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-04T12:18:01Z
dc.date.available2024-04-04T12:18:01Z
dc.date.issued2014-01-24
dc.description.abstractControlled laboratory experiments were conducted to demonstrate the use of passive samplers for soil vapor concentration monitoring. Five different passive samplers were studied (Radiello, SKC Ultra, Waterloo Membrane Sampler, ATD tubes and 3M OVM 3500). Ten different volatile organic compounds were used of varying classes (chlorinated ethanes, ethanes, and methanes, aliphatics and aromatics) and physical properties (vapor pressure, solubility and sorption). Samplers were exposed in randomized triplicates to concentrations of 1, 10 and 100 ppmv, with a relative humidity of ∼80%, a temperature of ∼24 °C, and a duration of 30 minutes in a chamber with a face velocity of about 5 cm min−1. Passive samplers are more commonly used for longer sample durations (e.g., 8 hour workday) and higher face velocities (>600 cm min−1), so testing to verify the performance for these conditions was needed. Summa canister samples were collected and analyzed by EPA Method TO-15 to establish a baseline for comparison for all the passive samplers. Low-uptake rate varieties of four of the samplers were also tested at 10 ppmv under two conditions; with 5 cm min−1 face velocity and stagnant conditions to assess whether low or near-zero face velocities would result in a low bias from the starvation effect. The results indicate that passive samplers can provide concentration measurements with accuracy (mostly within a factor of 2) and precision (RSD < 15%) comparable to conventional Summa canister samples and EPA Method TO-15 analysis. Some compounds are challenging for some passive samplers because of uncertainties in the uptake rates, or challenges with retention or recovery.en_UK
dc.identifier.citationMcAlary T, Groenevelt H, Seethapathy S, et al., (2014) Quantitative passive soil vapor sampling for VOCs-part 2: Laboratory experiments. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, Volume 16, Issue 3, March 2014, pp.491-500en_UK
dc.identifier.eissn2050-7895
dc.identifier.issn2050-7887
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1039/C3EM00128H
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/21139
dc.language.isoen_UKen_UK
dc.publisherRoyal Society of Chemistryen_UK
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/*
dc.titleQuantitative passive soil vapor sampling for VOCs- part 2: laboratory experimentsen_UK
dc.typeArticleen_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2014-01-22

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Passive_soil_vapor-2014.pdf
Size:
479.7 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.63 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Staff publications - Cranfield Health