@Ag8n, our goal is to have this system be less expensive and more sensitive than Draeger tubes. The pumps recommended for Draeger tubes are often very expensive, which we tried to address in the DIY Formaldehyde Kit discussed here: https://publiclab.org/wiki/formaldehyde-test-kit. However, we found out that the Kitagawa tubes (which appear to use basically the same chemistry and physics as the Draeger tubes) were not as selective for formaldehyde as would be ideal -- they reacted with other aldehydes and ketones (as noted here: https://publiclab.org/notes/gretchengehrke/10-07-2015/formaldehyde-measurement-testing-public-lab-s-kit-with-doh-s-equipment). So, taking these experiences into account, we've been working with industry and academic partners to improve on cost and performance. We're still in the validation phase though.
Thank you for your reply.
I looked at the paper referenced. The pump modifications look very good!
Glad to hear you are in the validation phase. Is the validation protocol available to the public?
Is this a question? Click here to post it to the Questions page.
hi @Ag8n, the validation work is being conducted by the Building Energy and Environmental Systems Laboratory at Syracuse University. The protocol is not yet public (and actually, i don't know if it ultimately will be or not -- i will ask!), but it involves building an exposure chamber and introducing known concentrations of formaldehyde and other common co-contaminants like acetone, acetaldehyde, and i think maybe acetonitrile (but i'm not sure).