Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:35:16.558Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Statistical Significance of Discrete Soot Particulate Microanalysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

David C. Bell*
Affiliation:
The University of Minnesota, Institute of Technology Characterization Facility 16 Shepherd labs, 100 Union Street S.E. Minneapolis, MN55455
Get access

Extract

Soot particles are generated from a number of sources, including auto emissions, aircraft emissions and various domestic and industrial combustor sources. Particle size and composition has been the focus of recent Environmental Protection Agency directives, especially due to the impact of small particulates on the inner urban environments. Single particle microanalysis is advantageous in these studies since, morphology and composition can be examined simultaneously. When a small sample size is available, single particle microanalysis is the only possible micro analytical approach. Chemical fingerprinting using the energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) signature of trace elements contained in the particles has shown remarkable source based uniqueness. Previous studies involving diesel soot particulates have indicated that most samples analyzed on a discrete basis are reasonably homogeneous, but questions still remain as to the ultimate statistical limit of this technique.

Type
Sir John Meurig Thomas Symposium: Microscopy and Microanalysis in the Chemical Sciences
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1)Bell, David C., Rainey, Lenore C. and Vander Sande, John B., Materials Research Society Proceedings, Symposium II, Vol. 502 Fall (1997).Google Scholar
2)Bell, David C., Rainey, Lenore C. and Vander Sande, John B., Proc. Air Pollution 99 San Francisco, WIT CMP PressGoogle Scholar
3)Wild, U. et. al. Fresenius’ Journal of Analytical Chemistry 357 (1997) pp 420428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4)Hughes, L. S. et. al. Environ. Sci. Tech. 33 No 20 pp 35063515CrossRefGoogle Scholar