Literature DB >> 26692585

Comparison of diffusion charging and mobility-based methods for measurement of aerosol agglomerate surface area.

Bon Ki Ku1, Pramod Kulkarni1.   

Abstract

We compare different approaches to measure surface area of aerosol agglomerates. The objective was to compare field methods, such as mobility and diffusion charging based approaches, with laboratory approach, such as Brunauer, Emmett, Teller (BET) method used for bulk powder samples. To allow intercomparison of various surface area measurements, we defined 'geometric surface area' of agglomerates (assuming agglomerates are made up of ideal spheres), and compared various surface area measurements to the geometric surface area. Four different approaches for measuring surface area of agglomerate particles in the size range of 60-350 nm were compared using (i) diffusion charging-based sensors from three different manufacturers, (ii) mobility diameter of an agglomerate, (iii) mobility diameter of an agglomerate assuming a linear chain morphology with uniform primary particle size, and (iv) surface area estimation based on tandem mobility-mass measurement and microscopy. Our results indicate that the tandem mobility-mass measurement, which can be applied directly to airborne particles unlike the BET method, agrees well with the BET method. It was also shown that the three diffusion charging-based surface area measurements of silver agglomerates were similar within a factor of 2 and were lower than those obtained from the tandem mobility-mass and microscopy method by a factor of 3-10 in the size range studied. Surface area estimated using the mobility diameter depended on the structure or morphology of the agglomerate with significant underestimation at high fractal dimensions approaching 3.

Keywords:  Aerosol surface area; Agglomerates; BET method; Diffusion charging; Mobility diameter; Tandem mobility–mass approach

Year:  2012        PMID: 26692585      PMCID: PMC4676603          DOI: 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2012.01.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Aerosol Sci        ISSN: 0021-8502            Impact factor:   3.433


  10 in total

1.  Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy.

Authors:  Günter Oberdörster; Andrew Maynard; Ken Donaldson; Vincent Castranova; Julie Fitzpatrick; Kevin Ausman; Janet Carter; Barbara Karn; Wolfgang Kreyling; David Lai; Stephen Olin; Nancy Monteiro-Riviere; David Warheit; Hong Yang
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2005-10-06       Impact factor: 9.400

Review 2.  Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel.

Authors:  Andre Nel; Tian Xia; Lutz Mädler; Ning Li
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-02-03       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Ultrafine particle characteristics in seven industrial plants.

Authors:  Karine Elihn; Peter Berg
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2009-05-15

4.  In situ structure characterization of airborne carbon nanofibres by a tandem mobility-mass analysis.

Authors:  Bon Ki Ku; Mark S Emery; Andrew D Maynard; Mark R Stolzenburg; Peter H McMurry
Journal:  Nanotechnology       Date:  2006-06-26       Impact factor: 3.874

5.  Aerosol monitoring during carbon nanofiber production: mobile direct-reading sampling.

Authors:  Douglas E Evans; Bon Ki Ku; M Eileen Birch; Kevin H Dunn
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2010-05-06

6.  Pulmonary nanoparticle exposure disrupts systemic microvascular nitric oxide signaling.

Authors:  Timothy R Nurkiewicz; Dale W Porter; Ann F Hubbs; Samuel Stone; Bean T Chen; David G Frazer; Matthew A Boegehold; Vincent Castranova
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Endocytosis, oxidative stress and IL-8 expression in human lung epithelial cells upon treatment with fine and ultrafine TiO2: role of the specific surface area and of surface methylation of the particles.

Authors:  Seema Singh; Tingming Shi; Rodger Duffin; Catrin Albrecht; Damien van Berlo; Doris Höhr; Bice Fubini; Gianmario Martra; Ivana Fenoglio; Paul J A Borm; Roel P F Schins
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2007-05-18       Impact factor: 4.219

8.  Nanoparticle inhalation impairs coronary microvascular reactivity via a local reactive oxygen species-dependent mechanism.

Authors:  A J LeBlanc; A M Moseley; B T Chen; D Frazer; V Castranova; T R Nurkiewicz
Journal:  Cardiovasc Toxicol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.231

9.  Instillation of six different ultrafine carbon particles indicates a surface area threshold dose for acute lung inflammation in mice.

Authors:  Tobias Stoeger; Claudia Reinhard; Shinji Takenaka; Andreas Schroeppel; Erwin Karg; Baerbel Ritter; Joachim Heyder; Holger Schulz
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Surface area of particle administered versus mass in determining the pulmonary toxicity of ultrafine and fine carbon black: comparison to ultrafine titanium dioxide.

Authors:  Tina M Sager; Vincent Castranova
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2009-05-04       Impact factor: 9.400

  10 in total
  3 in total

1.  Toward Developing a New Occupational Exposure Metric Approach for Characterization of Diesel Aerosols.

Authors:  Emanuele G Cauda; Bon Ki Ku; Arthur L Miller; Teresa L Barone
Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.908

2.  Properties that influence the specific surface areas of carbon nanotubes and nanofibers.

Authors:  M Eileen Birch; Toni A Ruda-Eberenz; Ming Chai; Ronnee Andrews; Randal L Hatfield
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2013-09-12

3.  Non-doped and transition metal-doped CuO nano-powders: structure-physical properties and anti-adhesion activity relationship.

Authors:  N Khlifi; S Mnif; F Ben Nasr; N Fourati; C Zerrouki; M M Chehimi; H Guermazi; S Aifa; S Guermazi
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 4.036

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.