Table 2 Passive sampling and LC-HRMS method and instrumental performance for the 15 selected analyte vapours.

From: Sorbent Film-Coated Passive Samplers for Explosives Vapour Detection Part A: Materials Optimisation and Integration with Analytical Technologies

Compound

tr in min (%RSD) n = 6a

Calculated ion (m/z)

δ (ppm)

Recovery ± SD (%) n = 6b

Precision (height %RSD) n ≥ 6a

Linearity (R) n ≥ 9c

LOD n ≥ 9c

Linear range: Passive Sampler + LC-HRMS (ng on sampler) n ≥ 9d

LC-HRMS

Passive Sampling + LC-HRMS

LC-HRMSc

Passive Sampler + LC-HRMSd

LC-HRMS (pg on column)c

Passive Sampler + LC-HRMS (ng dm−3)d

HMTD

2.4 (0.7)

207.0976

−0.97

2 ± 1

7

30.4

0.999

n.d.

135

37000

n.d.

EGDN

2.9 (0.5)

61.9884

+1.61

93 ± 7

20

27.8

0.998

0.997

520

2000

2.5–50

HMDD

3.7 (0.7)

177.0870

−0.56

61 ± 35

24

64.9

0.993

0.998

270

370

0.5–100

3,4-DNT

4.8 (0.3)

182.0333

−0.55

79 ± 11

22

36.4

0.999

0.989

15

5

0.5–100

DMNB

4.6 (0.5)

194.1135

−0.52

50 ± 10

13

34.4

0.982

0.993

350

740

1–100

2,3-DNT

5.4 (0.7)

182.0333

−0.55

94 ± 7

23

42.4

0.995

0.989

715

7

0.5–50

NG

5.3 (0.5)

61.9884

+1.61

80 ± 15

23

19.2

0.999

0.999

20

18500

25–100

TNT

5.1 (0.4)

227.0184

−1.32

10 ± 7

25

46.5

0.994

0.979

25

10

2.5–50

2,6-DNT

5.8 (0.4)

182.0333

−0.55

91 ± 7

6

19.8

0.993

0.999

135

10

0.5–100

DADP

5.3 (0.5)

89.0597

−4.49

50 ± 10

26

14.9

0.999

0.999

10

370

0.5–100

2,4-DNT

6.0 (0.7)

181.0255

−0.55

79 ± 13

24

44.4

0.997

0.996

10

9

0.5–100

TATP

6.4 (0.5)

89.0597

−3.37

43 ± 5

5

27.2

0.998

0.982

105

89

0.5–100

2-NT

6.9 (0.7)

136.0404

0

72 ± 4

26

10.0

0.998

0.924

1090

3700

5–100

4-NT

7.2 (0.5)

136.0404

0

50 ± 10

27

10.7

0.999

0.995

255

1850

2.5–100

3-NT

137.0482

0

70 ± 13

22

n.d.

0.999

n.d.

82660

n.d.

n.d.

  1. n.d. = not detected; an = 6 for 0.135 dm3 voids spiked with 5 µg explosives; samplers exposed for 120 h and samples injected in triplicate (n = 18); bn = 6 for 0.135 dm3 voids spiked with 5 µg explosives; samplers exposed for 72 h and samples injected in triplicate (n = 18); cn = 16 concentrations were prepared in duplicate (0.001–100 µg mL−1) and injected in triplicate (n = 96); d0.135 dm3 voids spiked at five exposure levels i.e. 0.05–10 µg (n = 3 for each, n = 6 at 5 µg), samplers exposed for 120 h and samples injected in triplicate (n = 54).