Jump to main content
Jump to site search

Issue 11, 2011
Previous Article Next Article

A laboratory comparison of analytical methods used for isocyanates

Author affiliations

Abstract

Monomeric and oligomeric 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI) and isophorone diisocyanate (IPDI) are components of catalyst hardeners in two-part polyurethane coating systems. Exposure to these isocyanates in the collision repair industry has been associated with increased risk for work-related asthma; however their quantitation remains a challenging task. Four analytical methods were compared: modified version of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Method 5525 (NIOSH); liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry (LC/MS) using 1-(2-methoxyphenyl)piperazine (MPP) as the derivatizing reagent; modified version of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration Method 42/PV2034 (OSHA); and modified version of the Omega ISO-CHEK® Method (WA-DOSH). Five levels of a widely used clear coat hardener were spiked onto sampling media. A reference value was calculated by using a hardener NCO titration and manufacturer composition data. Intra- and inter-method variability was determined. All methods measuring NCO-HDI monomer, NCO-IPDI monomer, NCO-IPDI oligomers, and total NCO mass (except OSHA method) compared well against the reference values (slopes ≥ 0.816, R2 > 0.90). The NCO-HDI oligomer results for the NIOSH method compared well with the reference values (slope = 1.161, standard error = 0.046 and R2 = 0.98, p < 0.001) while WA-DOSH were above (slope = 2.293, standard error = 0.055 and R2 = 0.99, p < 0.001) and LC/MS were below (slope = 0.264, standard error = 0.011 and R2 = 0.98, p < 0.001) the reference values. The principal challenges associated with comparing methods were: 1) the reporting metrics were not always directly comparable and 2) not all methods reported all isocyanate species of interest. Although this present study provided valuable information, a more extensive investigation is required in order to critically evaluate these methodological differences.

Graphical abstract: A laboratory comparison of analytical methods used for isocyanates

Back to tab navigation

Supplementary files

Publication details

The article was received on 16 Apr 2011, accepted on 31 Aug 2011 and first published on 20 Sep 2011


Article type: Paper
DOI: 10.1039/C1AY05225J
Citation: Anal. Methods, 2011,3, 2478-2487
  •   Request permissions

    A laboratory comparison of analytical methods used for isocyanates

    D. M. Ceballos, S. G. Whittaker, M. G. Yost, R. L. Dills, D. Bello, J. M. Thomasen, L. A. Nylander-French, C. K. Reeb-Whitaker, P. M. Peters, E. C. Weiland and W. W. Suydam, Anal. Methods, 2011, 3, 2478
    DOI: 10.1039/C1AY05225J

Search articles by author

Spotlight

Advertisements