4.8 Article

Excitation-Emission Matrix Spectroscopy for Analysis of Chemical Composition of Combustion Generated Particulate Matter

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 54, Issue 13, Pages 8198-8209

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c01110

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health [U01 EB021923, NIEHS R42ES026532]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Analysis of particulate matter (PM) is important for the assessment of human exposures to potentially harmful agents, notably combustion-generated PM. Specifically, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) found in ultrafine PM have been linked to cardiovascular diseases and carcinogenic and mutagenic effects. In this study, we quantify the presence and concentrations of PAHs with lower molecular weight (LMW, 126 < MW < 202) and higher molecular weight (HMW, 226 < MW < 302), i.e., smaller and larger than Pyrene, in combustion-generated PM using excitation-emission matrix (EEM) fluorescence spectroscopy. Laboratory combustion PM samples were generated in a laminar diffusion inverted gravity flame reactor (IGFR) operated on ethylene and ethane. Fuel dilution by Ar in 0% to 90% range controlled the flame temperature. The colder flames result in lower PM yields however, the PM PAH content increases significantly. Temperature thresholds for PM transition from low to high organic carbon content were characterized based on the maximum flame temperature (T-max,T-c similar to 1791 to 1857 K) and the highest soot luminosity region temperature (T*(c) similar to 1600 to 1650K). Principal component regression (PCR) analysis of the EEM spectra of IGFR samples correlates to GCMS data with R-2 = 0.988 for LMW and 0.998 for HMW PAHs. PCR-EEM analysis trained on the IGFR samples was applied to PM samples from woodsmoke and diesel exhaust, the model accurately predicts HMW PAH concentrations with R-2 = 0.976 and overestimates LMW PAHs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available