Lead contamination in drinking water is a worldwide problem affecting people in developing as well as developed countries. While lead contamination levels are routinely monitored at water treatment facilities, many water sources get contaminated with lead during distribution (lead pipes). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a regulation that limits the amount of lead concentration in drinking water to below 15 ppb. To ensure that drinking water is not lead contaminated, different methods are applied for detecting lead concentration in water. The most common methods include colorimetry, atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) and inductively coupled plasma (ICP) emission spectroscopy. These techniques can measure the lead concentration accurately; however, these methods are expensive and require access to advanced instrumentation, which is accessible only through certified laboratories. Therefore, it is essential to develop a low-cost, portable and reliable lead sensor for use in homes and offices.
Embodiments described herein relate to a sensor and method for detecting, identifying, quantifying, and/or determining the amount or concentration of lead in an aqueous solution, and particularly relates to a sensor for detecting, identifying, quantifying, and/or determining the amount or concentration of lead in an aqueous solution, such as water or other fluids. Advantageously, the sensor enables detection of ppb-levels of lead in water.
The sensor includes a copper working electrode, a counter electrode, a power supply, and a current measuring device. The copper working electrode and counter electrode are configured for placement in the aqueous solution. The power supply is configured to apply underpotential deposition of lead onto the copper electrode from the aqueous solution. The measuring device provides measurement of a hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) current on the lead underpotential (Pbupd)-modified electrode. The sensor can also include a means for correlating the degree of suppression of the HER current to Pbupd coverage to determine the lead coverage and lead concentration of the solution.
The sensor works on the principle of Pbupd form the aqueous solution onto the copper electrode followed by measurement of the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) current on the Pbupd-modified electrode surface. The degree of suppression of the HER current is correlated to Pbupd coverage, which in turn depends on the lead concentration in solution. The HER current of the Pbupd covered electrode can be compared to the HER baseline current on lead-free electrode to determine the lead coverage and thus the lead concentration of the solution.
In some embodiments, the sensor can include a substrate, a copper working electrode formed on a surface of the substrate, and a counter electrode formed on the surface of the substrate. The counter electrode can include a metalized film, such as gold, platinum, palladium, silver, carbon, alloys thereof, and composites thereof. The films used to form the working electrode and counter electrode can be provided on the surface of the substrate by film printing or sputtering or coating the films on the surface and then optionally laser ablating the films to form the working electrode and counter electrode.
In some embodiment, the copper working electrode can have an irregular needle-like dendrite surface profile that is defined by underlying dendrites of electrodeposited zinc. A sensor as described herein with a copper working with the dendrite surface profile can have decreased lead sensing time compared to sensor with a copper electrode having a planar surface.
Unless specifically addressed herein, all terms used have the same meaning as would be understood by those of skilled in the art of the subject matter of the application. The following definitions will provide clarity with respect to the terms used in the specification and claims.
As used herein, the term “quantitative data” or “quantitative level” or “quantitative amount” refers to data, levels, or amounts associated with any dataset components (e.g., markers, clinical indicia,) that can be assigned a numerical value.
As used herein, the terms “control” or “control sample” refer to one or more samples in which the concentration of the lead is known.
Embodiments described herein relate to an electrochemical sensor and method for detecting, identifying, quantifying, and/or determining the amount or concentration of lead in a sample, and particularly relates to a sensor for detecting, identifying, quantifying, and/or determining the amount or concentration of lead in a sample, such as tap or drinking water or other aqueous fluids.
In some embodiments, the electrochemical sensor 10 can include a reference electrode (not shown) and a measuring device (not shown) for applying voltage potentials to the working electrode and counter electrode and measuring the hydrogen evolution current of the lead covered working electrode and the hydrogen evolution baseline current on lead-free electrode to determine the level of the lead in a sample, such as a drinking water.
By way of example, an electrochemical sensor was provided that included a Cu wafer with surface area of 1 cm2 as the working electrode, and Ag/AgCl electrode as the reference electrode, and a Pt wire as the counter electrode. Electrolytes were prepared utilizing deionized water with 10 mM perchloric acid and with varying concentrations of Pb2+ (10 ppb-1 ppm). A potentiostat with data acquisition was used for the electrochemical measurements.
The pre-cleaned copper working electrode was immersed into the Pb+2-containing electrolyte. Underpotential deposition (UPD) of lead was performed on the copper surface at an applied potential of −0.4 V vs. Ag/AgCl for a set time period t. After lead UPD surface coverage on Cu increased (surface coverage depends on UPD time t and concentration [Pb2+]), the electrode potential was immediately switched to −0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl for 50 s to measure the hydrogen evolution current (Im). Stripping coulometry was employed to strip the underpotentially deposited lead at an applied potential of −0.2 V vs. Ag/AgCl for 50 s to recover the bare copper surface. The hydrogen evolution baseline current (Ib) on the blank (Pb-free) Cu substrate was then measured at an applied potential of −0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl for 50 s; (v) The change in hydrogen evolution current ΔI=Ib−Im was calculated. ΔI is related to the hydrogen evolution suppression due to underpotentially deposited lead and thus is a measure of the lead concentration in the test solution. For a given UPD time, higher Pb+2 concentration in the sample solution will provide a larger PbUPD coverage on Cu, and thus a larger suppression of the hydrogen evolution current.
In some embodiments, as shown in
External power supply 68 and ammeter 70 can be incorporated together with essential automation in a handheld sensor (not shown) that can work autonomously. The two electrodes can be incorporated into a one-time use chip that can be attached to the handheld device.
In some embodiments, the working electrode, counter electrode, and optional reference electrode may be formed using laser ablation, a process which can produce elements with features that are less than one-thousandth of an inch. Laser ablation enables the precise definition of the working electrode, counter electrode, and reference electrode as well as electrical connecting leads and other features, which is required to reduce coefficient of variation and provide accurate measurements. Metalized films, such as Cu, Au, Pd, and Pt or any metal having similar electrochemical properties, that can be sputtered or coated on plastic substrates, such as PET or polycarbonate, or other dielectric material, can be irradiated using laser ablation to provide these features.
In some embodiments, in order to decrease the lead sensing time of the sensor, the copper working electrode can have an irregular needle-like dendrite surface profile as opposed to a planar surface. As illustrated in
The Example that follows illustrates embodiments of the present invention and are not limiting of the specification and claims in any way.
In this Example, we developed an electrochemical lead (Pb) sensor based on the principle of lead underpotential deposition (Pbupd). Pb exhibits UPD on copper (Cu). At suitable electrode potentials, a Cu electrode can be coated with a monolayer of Pbupd. The Pbupd surface coverage on Cu depends on the UPD time (tupd) and the Pb2+ concentration. The Pbupd layer when formed on Cu, depending on its coverage (θ), suppresses the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) current. The extent of HER suppression provides reliable quantification of the Pb surface coverage and thus the Pb2+ concentration in solution. In this Example, we report the feasibility of this sensing concept for detecting Pb2+ in the 10 ppb range in aerated electrolytes.
Deposition of Pbupd on Cu
Pbupd deposition was performed in a three-electrode setup comprised of a sputter-deposited Cu substrate as the working electrode (area=1 cm2), a saturated Ag/AgCl (Fisher Scientific) reference electrode, and a Pt wire as counter electrode. The Cu substrate was pretreated in acid (2M H2SO4) for 60 s followed by a DI water rinse. An electrolyte containing 10 mM perchloric acid (HClO4, Fisher Scientific) and various concentrations (10 ppb, 100 ppb and 1 ppm) of lead perchlorate [Pb(ClO4)2, 99% purity, Acros Organics] was employed. The electrolyte was prepared using 18 MΩ-cm DI water. Such an electrolyte, although idealized compared to actual water samples, was deemed appropriate for demonstrating the basic sensor operation. For Pbupd characterization, the electrolyte was de aerated; however, for Pb2+ detection, de-aeration was not applied. Pbupd was performed on Cu at an applied potential of −0.4 V vs. Ag/AgCl for various time periods (tupd). To quantify the coverage of Pbupd on Cu, anodic stripping coulometry was used in which the Pbupd layer was potentiostatically stripped at −0.2 V vs. Ag/AgCl for 50 s and the net stripping charge density (Q) was measured.
Measurement of the HER Current on Pbupd-Modified Cu for Quantifying Pb2+ Concentration
In aerated electrolytes, Pbupd deposition on Cu was followed by measurement of the HER current. Sensor operation consisted of the following stepwise sequence (
(i) Pbupd deposition onto Cu at −0.4 V vs. Ag/AgCl for tupd ranging from 100-30000 s.
(ii) Measurement of the HER current (Im) on Pbupd-modified Cu by switching the applied potential to −0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl and allowing the HER current to reach steady-state in 50 s. Note that, at −0.8 V, background currents due to Pb deposition and O2-reduction (ORR) may be present but these do not affect sensing as discussed below.
(iii) Stripping of the Pbupd layer formed in (i) at −0.2 V vs. Ag/AgCl to recover the bare Cu surface, followed by measurement of the HER current (I0) on the bare Cu at −0.8 V. The current response to switching of the potential in steps (i)-(iii) is schematically shown in
ΔI=I0−Im [1]
ΔI represents the suppression of HER due to the presence of underpotentially deposited Pb on the Cu electrode. As Pbupd time in step (i) increases, the Pb coverage θ also increases and this causes an increase in ΔI. The concentration dependence of this ΔI−tupd relationship is the foundational principle of operation of the sensor.
Characteristics of Pbupd Formation on Cu
where Qmax represents the charge density associated with saturation surface concentration of Pbupd where all surface sites available for UPD are occupied (about 300 μC/cm2).
HER Suppression on Pbupd-Modified Cu
As Pbupd covers the Cu surface, it suppresses H2 evolution because of the very low exchange current density for HER on Pb.
Quantifying the Dependence of ΔI/I0 on Pb2+ Concentration and Pbupd Time (tupd)
As shown in
where Γ is the Pb saturation surface concentration (1.55×10−9 mol/cm2), Cb is the Pb2+ concentration, and k is a rate constant. Initially (t=0), the coverage θ=0. Furthermore, when θ is small, Eq. [3] yields:
On Pbupd-covered sites on the Cu electrode, the HER current is negligibly small. Thus, HER proceeds only on exposed Cu sites at a current given as:
Im=I0(1−θ) [5]
Combining Eqns. [1], [4] and [5], ΔI/I0 exhibits the following dependence on Cb and tupd:
First, the linear dependence of ΔI/I0 on tupd seen in Eq. [6] is consistent with experimental data (
From the above description of the invention, those skilled in the art will perceive improvements, changes and modifications. Such improvements, changes and modifications within the skill of the art are intended to be covered by the appended claims. All references, publications, and patents cited in the present application are herein incorporated by reference in their entirety.
This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/620,786, filed Jan. 23, 2018, the subject matter of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Entry |
---|
L. T. Viyannalage, et al. “Electrochemical Method for Quantitative Determination of Trace Amounts of Lead”, Analytical Chemistry, 80(6): p. 2042-2049, Mar. 15 (Year: 2008). |
S. Venugopalan, “Kinetics of hydrogen-evolution reaction on lead and lead-alloy electrodes in sulfuric acid electrolyte with phosphoric acid and antimony additives”, vol. 48, Issue 3, Mar. 19, 1994, pp. 371-384. |
Kirowa-Eisner, et al., “Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry”, vol. 552, Jul. 30, 2003, pp. 171-183. |
Vasilic, et al., “Open circuit stability of underpotentially deposited Pb monolayer on Cu(111)”, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 580 (2005) 203-212. |
Kang, et al., “Determination of Lead with Copper-Based Electrochemical Sensor”, Anal Chem. Mar. 21, 2017; 89(6): 3345-3352. |
Kim, et al., “Fluorescent and colorimetric sensors for detection of lead, cadmium, and mercury ions”, Chem Soc Rev., Apr. 21, 2012;41(8):3210-44. |
Bonfil, et al., “Analytics Chimica Acta”, vol. 457, Issue 2, Apr. 22, 2002, pp. 285-296. |
Dai, et al., “A Simple, Cost-Effective Sensor for Detecting Lead Ions inWater Using Under-Potential Deposited Bismuth Sub-Layer with Differential Pulse Voltammetry (DPV)”, Sensors 2017, 17, 950, pp. 1-11. |
Wuilloud, et al., “Determination of Lead in Drinking Water by ICP-AES With Ultrasonic Nebulization and Flow-Injection On-Line Preconcentration Using an Amberlite XAD-16 Resin”, Analytical Letters, 35(10), 1649-1665 (2002). |
Bertenshaw, et al., “Determination of lead in drinking water by atomic-absorption spectrophotometry with electrothermal atomisation”, Issue 1258, 1981. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190227030 A1 | Jul 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62620786 | Jan 2018 | US |