Chris Rawlinson, Justin Frosina
British American Tobacco Group Research & Development, Southampton UK
1
Non-targeted Analysis of Emissions From E-cigarettes
Non-Targeted Screen
Overview
• Why is a non-targeted approach required?
› Appropriate stewardship
• Challenges
› Matrix
• Existing methodology
› Not sensitive enough
• New E-cigarette Screen
› 50 fold increase in sensitivity
› 4 x faster
2
Why is a non-targeted approach required?
• Requirement to assess delivery at trace levels:
› Product Stewardship
› Thermal degradation of components in formulation
› Impurities and contaminants
› Product Development
› Flavour transfer
› Formulation/Device fingerprinting
3
Challenges
• No combustion, resulting in significantly ‘cleaner’ sample matrix compared to combustibles
4
55mL 1R5F
55mL E-cigarette
Main Constituents
- Water - Glycerol/Propylene Glycol- nicotine- Potentially flavours
Delivery mechanism- Wick and heated coil- Flow or button actuated
Emissions- Liquid aerosol- Limited true gas phase
Challenges - High levels main constituents
E-cigarette Emission Screen
E-cigarette Summary
5
Summary of Existing Approach
GC-MS Combustible Scan Method
7
Approach Results Method Performance
CFP Solvent Extract
15mL Solvent resulting in large dilution -1µL Injection
CFP SPME Analysis
SPME fibres selective and significant artefacts
detected in blanks
Tedlar BagLimited true ‘vapour
phase’
E-cigarette Emission Screen
Method Requirement
• Whole emission non-targeted screen
› Qualititative characterisation of emissions
› GC/LC - amenable components
• Semi-Quantitative
› Referenced to ISTD (order of magnitude assessment)
• 5ng/puff Threshold
› Addressing toxicant thresholds
• Defined Sampling Conditions
› Agreed standard approach
› Flexibility remains important
• Data management
› Automated approach
8
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
Sample Generation
• A14/LX1 Linear Syringe Drive Engine
› Consistent and flexible delivery
› Rapid sampling
› 1x 80ml 3 second puff per sample
› Disposable Tygon connector
› Zero ‘dead volume’
› Impact Vs Adsorption?
10
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
Sampling – TD Tubes
• Dual bed sorbent
1. Tenax - Polymer based sorbent:
› General purpose sorbent
› Suitable for C6 – C30
› Limited water retention
› Stable to 320°C
2. Sulficarb - Molecular sieve:
› Strong sorbent – Light volatiles
› C3 – C6
› Requires water management
› Stable to 360°C
11
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
Analysis – TD Automation
• Whole emissions captured on TD tube
• Automated ISTD addition› TO-14A tuning mix
› 11ng bromochloromethane
› 14.5ng 1-bromo-4-fluorobenzene
› 10ng chlorobenzene-d5
› 9.5ng 1,4-difluorobenzene
• Recollection system utilised to identify:› True components present in emission
› Components undergoing thermal degradation
but also present in emissions
› Tube/system artefacts
12
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
Analysis - Recollection Explained
13
Sa
mp
le t
ub
eR
ec
oll
ec
tio
n t
ub
e 1
Re
co
lle
cti
on
tu
be
2
�
���
���
���
���
���
�
���
�
���
80mL
3 second
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
Recollection Explained
14
1
2
3
Some degradation during desorption but majority present as a result of emission: Small increase/injection
True emission component: Reducing/injection
Tube artefact: Doubling/injection
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
Why Heart-Cutting ?
• Major constituents limit detector life
› Overloaded peaks not representative
1. Manage major constituents by reducing overall loading:
› Reduction in sensitivity due to increased splits
› Unable to achieve 5ng/puff threshold
2. Managing major peaks by heart cutting to FID
› Sensitivity can be improved by reducing splits
› Ability to detect compounds present at 5ng/puff and lower
› Trace level components detectable
› Increase detector lifetime
15
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
TD-GC-TOFMS with Heart cutting
18
PG
Gly
cero
l
Nic
otine
~5ng/Puff
~5ng
10ng C
hlo
robenzene-d
5
E-Cigarette Emissions Screen
Data Management - Automation
• Chemometrics platform under development› Automated component identification (multiple data files - multiplicity
threshold)
› Removes analyst subjectivity
› High throughput (< 5 minutes per sample)
› Multivariate statistical analysis
19
E-Cigarette Emissions Screen
Data Management
20
• Approximately 40-100 components detected at or above 5ng/puff
› Product Dependent
› Approximate C3-C13 range
RT (min) Peak Area
Peak Identification Match Factor CAS #Recollection
InterpretationEstimated mass on tube (ng)
7.202 75819119 Allyl alcohol 746 107-18-6 G 600
19.809 62969489 Glycerol + Nicotyrine 702 + 771 56-81-5 + 487-19-4 G 498
18.675 48479488 Myosmine 889 532-12-7 G 384
31.691 34136399 Cotinine 930 486-56-6 G 270
6.550 29355053 Hydroxymandelic acid ethyl ester di-TMS 696 unknown G 232
4.837 25163696 Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane 896 556-67-2 G 199
15.482 22330272 Hexaoxacyclo octadecane 784 17455-13-9 G 177
23.572 21773939 Dioxolane-dimethanol 689 54120-69-3 G 172
8.316 21079900 Dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane 658 540-97-6 G 167
11.232 19012572 Acetic acid 821 64-19-7 A 150
E-cigarette Emissions Screen
Summary
22
Approach Results Method Performance
CFP Solvent Extract (60 mins)
15mL Solvent resulting in large dilution –1µL Injection
CFP SPME Analysis(70 mins)
SPME fibres selective and significant artefacts
detected in blanks
Tedlar Bag(18 mins)
Limited true ‘vapour phase’
TD
(36 mins)<5ng/puff detection
capability, one analysis
• <5ng/puff Sensitivity• Single analysis (GC)• Fully automated process• Analyst subjectivity removed• Robust data
What Next?
• Plan for ‘validation’
› Against target compound list
› Extremes of operation
› Optimise collection media
• Heat-not-Burn Screen under development
› More complex emissions
› Wide range of potential operating conditions
23