Gravitational Transport of Particles
in Pure Gases and Gas Mixtures
S. K. Dua, P. Brand, E. Karg, and J. Heyder
Clarkson Uniuersity, Department of Chemistry
Potsdum, NY 13699-5810, USA (S.K.D.)
GSF Forschungszentrum fir Umwelt und Gesundheit, Projekt Inhalation
P.O. Box 11.29, 0-85758, Oherschleissheim, Gemuny (P.B.; E.K.; J.H.)
Sedimentation velocities of 0.96- and 1.52-pm
monodisperse polystyrene latex particles in pure gases
and gas mixtures at 23" and 37°C have been measured
using a sedimentation cell. The gases used for the
measurement were N,, O,, Ar, He, CO,, SF,, air,
80%He-20%0,, 70%He-20%0,-10%N,, 80%SF6-
20%0,, 70%SF,-20%0,-10%N, and 80%Ar-20%0,.
Calculations of the terminal sedimentation velocity were
also done using the parameters appropriate for the
particles and the gaseous media. There was good agree-
ment between the observed and the predicted sedimen-
INTRODUCTION
For aerosol particles of diameters above
0.6 pm, in still air, gravitational transport
is the main mechanism for the deposition
in the lungs (Davies, 1973). Particles of
this size are often used to study particle
deposition and clearance in the lungs
(Swift et al., 1982; Anderson et al., 1988;
Kreyling et al., 1991) and for lung func-
tion testing (Beinert et al., 1990). Re-
cently particle deposition in the lungs has
been reported to depend not only on the
inhalation conditions (tidal volume, air
flow rate) but also on the composition of
the inspired gas (Swift et al., 1982;
"Correspondencc should be addressed to: Dr. S. K.
Dua, Chemistry Department, Clarkson University,
Potsdam, NY 13699-5810, USA.
tation velocities. The measured sedimentation veloci-
ties ranged from 28.5 p m s -'
in Ar to 40.2 p m s in -'
He for 0.96 p m and from 65.6 p m s - ' in
80%Ar-20%0, to 96.8 p m s - ' in CO, for 1.52-pm
aerosols at 23°C. At 37°C the values were generally
lower (within 5%) than at 23°C. The sedimentation
velocities in 80%He-20%02, 70%He-20%02-10%N,,
80%SF,-20%0,, 70%SF,-20%0,-10%N, gases were
within 11% and in 80%Ar-20%0, within 20.4% of
those in air.
Svartengren et al., 1989; Heyder et al.,
1991). Since the deposition of these parti-
cles is strongly dependent on the mean
terminal sedimentation velocity, while
performing studies with different gases,
the influence of the gas composition on
the sedimentation must also be consid-
ered. In the past, evaluations of the sedi-
mentation velocity of monodisperse parti-
cles in various gases and gas mixtures
were based on the theoretical estimations
(Briant, 1990). In the present study mea-
surements of the sedimentation velocity
of monodisperse polystyrene latex parti-
cles suspended in various pure gases and
gas mixtures are performed using a sedi-
mentation cell. A comparison between the
measured and the predicted values based
on the theory is made. The pure gases
used are nitrogen (N,), oxygen (O,), ar-
A e m m l Scicncc a n d Technology 21:170 178 (1994)
O 1914 C l s c v ~ c rScience Inc.
Gravitational Transport of Particles in Gases
gon (Ar), helium (He), carbon dioxide
(CO,), sulfur hexafluoride (SF,) and the
mixtures are air, heliox (80%He-20%0,
and 70%He-20%0,-10%N,), sulphox
( 8 0 % SF,-20% 0 , a n d 7 0 % SF,-
20%0,-10%N2) and 80%Ar-20%0,.
Studies are carried at the laboratory tem-
perature (23°C) and the human body tem-
perature (37°C) using monodisperse latex
particles of 0.96- and 1.52-pm diameters.
THE SEDIMENTATION CELL
Figure 1 shows the schematics of the sedi-
mentation cell used for the study. It is
similar to the one used by Stahlhofen et
al. (1975). The settling path of the parti-
cles has an internal diameter of 6 mm and
is located along the axis of a cylindrical
copper block of 68 mm diameter and 180
mm height. The aerosol to be studied is
filled in this channel and both ends are
shut by vacuum tight valves. The aerosol
particles are illuminated by a He-Ne laser
beam of 5 mW output (Model PL-750,
Polytec GmbH Waldbronn, Germany).
The beam enters the aerosol channel
through a hole in the copper block. The
inlet of the beam is closed by a double
6 mm
I I
1 , aerosol in
valve
copper block
FIGURE 1. Schematic diagram of sedimentation
cell.
window glass plate which consists of infra
red light (IR) absorbing materials. The
laser beam passes the viewing field with-
out touching the walls and then vanishes
in a light trap.
The particles are observed under a
mean scattering angle of 90" by means of
a microscope, a charge coupled device
(CCD) camera, a video screen and a pro-
cessing system. The objective lens of the
microscope is fixed inside a cylindrical
bore of the copper block and isolated
from the settling chamber by an IR ab-
sorbing glass plate. An area of 2 mm x 2
mm is viewed and the magnification factor
at the screen is 64.
The processing system automatically
observes single particles and analyses the
data. As soon as a particle enters the field
of view of the lens it is marked and fol-
lowed up to a settling distance of about 1
mm or less, if it runs out of focus. The
time taken to travel this distance is mea-
sured and the sedimentation velocity is
calculated and displayed on the screen.
To calibrate the settling distance in
terms of the distance between two hori-
zontal lines on the screen, a standard
graticule (5 + 100/100 mm, Carl Zeiss,
Oberkochen, Germany) and monodis-
perse latex particles are used.
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Monodisperse polystyrene latex particles
(Duke Scientific Corp., California, USA)
of nominal diameters 0.966 p m and 1.53
p m were used for the study. The count
median diameter and the geometric stan-
dard deviation of 0.966-pm particles mea-
sured by electron microscope (Scanning
Microscope, Model 7300F, Joel, Tokyo,
Japan) were 0.961 p m and 1.024 respec-
tively, and that of 1.53-pm particles by
optical microscope (Axioplan, Carl Zeiss,
Oberkochen, Germany) were 1.518 p m
and 1.018. The sizes reported in this paper
correspond to microscopic measurements.
172
The stock suspensions of latex were
diluted with filtered deionized water and
the surfactant was removed by centrifug-
ing (Allen and Raabe, 1985). The latex
aerosol particles were dispersed with a
medical nebulizer (Paul Ritzau Pari-Werk,
Starnberg, Germany) by using the desired
filtered gas, diluted with the gas, and dried
by passing through a diffusion drier. They
were then passed through the sedimenta-
tion cell. The gas flushing time was large
enough to ensure that the cell was at the
gas atmosphere. The cell valves were then
shut and the measurements were per-
formed after 5 minutes for the cell to
attain thermodynamic equilibrium.
The measurements were carried out at
two temperatures namely the laboratory
temperature (23°C) and the human body
temperature (37°C). The cell was covered
with a heating element and isolated from
the surroundings by covering with an alu-
minum foil. For the measurements at the
body temperature, the heating element
was switched on.
For the measurements at the body tem-
perature the temperature on the surface
of the cell was continuously monitored
and was checked to be the same as inside
the cell before making the measurements.
The temperatures during the entire study
were within the range 37"-38°C and steady
during any measurement. The atmo-
spheric pressures were in the range
94.4-98.0 kPa. The sedimentation velocity
values (both observed and predicted) pre-
sented in this paper correspond to the
actual temperatures and pressures.
THEORY
The sedimentation velocity, V , of a sphere
of diameter d is given by
S. K. Dua et al.
where
V is the terminal sedimentation veloc-
ity (m s - ' )
p, is the density of the particle (kg
m-3)
p, is the density of the gas in which the
particles are suspended (kg m p 3 )
g is the acceleration due to gravity (m
sC2)
d is the diameter of the spherical parti-
cle (m)
is the viscosity of the gas (Pa s)
C(d) is the Cunningham slip correction
The gas density, p,, at any temperature
T and pressure P is obtained from
where p , is the gas density at the refer-
ence temperature TJK) and p, at tem-
perature T (K). Po and P are the refer-
ence pressure (Po = 101.325 kPa) and the
laboratory pressure respectively. For the
gas mixture p, is given by
where yi is the component molar fraction
and p, the density of the ith gas compo-
nent.
The mean free path, A, of the gas
molecules at any temperature, T, and
pressure, P , is obtained from Eq. 4 (Wil-
leke, 1976).
where A,, To, and Po are the reference
mean free path, temperature, and pres-
sure, respectively. S is the Sutherland
constant.
The slip correction, C(d), is given by
Gravitational Transport of Particles in Gases
where a , p, y are the slip parameters as-
sociated with the mean free path, h,.
Rader (1990) has tabulated the values of
the mean free path, A,, and slip parame-
ters of some gases at the reference pres-
sure and at 23°C and has recommended
values for the slip parameters for other
gases.
Rader (1990) and Weast et al. (1989-
1990) have tabulated the values of q and
h for some gases at P, and at some tem-
peratures. The q at any other tempera-
ture is obtained from Eq. 6:
where q, and r) are the gas viscosities at
temperatures TOand T , respectively. S is
the Sutherland constant. Its values for
some gases are readily available and for
others, it is often calculated from the
known values of q at two temperatures
using Eq. 6 (Briant, 1990).
The viscosity of a gas mixture by
Brokaw method is given by (Reid et al.,
1977)
where n is number of gases in the mix-
ture, 7 is the viscosity of the gas mixture,
y, is the component molar fraction, and 77,
is the component viscosity.
where rl, and rl, are the viscosities of the
ith and jth components. For nonpolar
gases S i j = Sji = 1. For a polar gas expres-
sions for Sij and Sji are given by Reid et
173
al. (1977). A,, is the fraction of molecular
weight ratios.
where
and Mi; = M i / M j , where Mi and M, are
the molecular weights of the ith and the
jth components, respectively.
The mean free path, A, for a gas or a
gas mixture at the standard pressure is
given by
where the quantities at a given tempera-
ture are
h the mean free path of the gas
molecules (m),
q the viscosity of the gas or the gas
mixture (Pa s),
p, the average gas density (kg m-3) at
the standard pressure,
C- the mean molecular speed (m s-')
and is calculated from the Eq. 12
(Briant, 1990):
where R is the universal gas constant
(8.31448 kg m2 s-2 K-' mol-I), MI the
molecular weight and y, the molar frac-
tion of the ith component. Table 1 ex-
174 S. K. Dua et al.

TABLE 1. Gas Parameters at Standard Pressure (101.325 k pa), at 23°C and 37°C
Sutherland
Viscosity ai Density at Mean Free Path at Slip Constant
23°C 37°C 23°C 37°C 23°C 37°C Parameter S
Gas Pa s) (lo3 kg m-3) ( pm) (Y (K)

N2 1.762 1.824 1.153 1.101 0.0658 0.0697 1.150 98.2

0 2 2.041 2.119 1.317 1.258 0.0713 0.0757 1.150 138.9
Ar 2.248 2.335 1.645 1.571 0.0703 0.0747 1.227 141.4
Hc 1.971 2.036 0.165 0.158 0.1943 0.2054 1.277 73.8
COZ 1.481 1.546 1.823 1.741 0.0438 0.0467 1.150 220.5
SF, 1.541 1.615 6.011 5.740 0.0252 0.0270 1.207 336.0
Air 1.835 1.901 1.192 1.138 0.0674 0.0714 1.207 110.4
80%He-20%0, 2.144 2.219 0.395 0.377 0.1014 0.1073 1.270 96.5
70YoHe-20Y00,-10%N2 2.107 2.181 0.494 0.472 0.0858 0.0909 1.270 97.4
80%SF6-20%02 1.622 1.698 5.071 4.842 0.0256 0.0275 1.207 297.0
70%SF6-20%0,-10%N2 1.653 1.729 4.586 4.379 0.0261 0.0280 1.207 276.8
80%Ar-20%0, 2.209 2.294 1.580 1.509 0.0703 0.0747 1.207 141.4
51 .8%He-48.2%SF6 1.818 1.900 2.983 2.848 0.0166 0.0178 1.207 251.2

hibits the values of 9,p,, A, a,and S for
various gases. The sedimentation velocity
is calculated using the parameters corre-
sponding to the actual temperature and
pressure at which the measurements are
performed. So, the observed and the pre-
dicted sedimentation velocities can be
easily compared (Tables 2 and 3).
RESULTS
Table 2 gives the observed mean sedimen-
tation velocity and the relative standard
deviation for 0.961-pm polystyrene latex
aerosols in different gases at 23" and 37°C.
It also presents the predicted values based
on the parameters 9,pg, A, and P corre-
sponding to the conditions prevalent dur-
ing the measurements. Table 3 gives simi-
lar values for 1.518-pm aerosols. For each
experiment measurements were made on
about 100 aerosol particles. A number of
measurements were made on the sedi-
mentation velocity in air and even small
change (increase or decrease due to
change in atmospheric pressure) could be
accurately predicted. The experiments
were repeated for all gases showing
greater than 2% deviation between the
observed and predicted values. The maxi-
mum difference between repeat measure-
ments was 1.5%.
Tables 2 and 3 show that there is good
agreement between the observed and the
predicted values. It is possible to measure
accurately even small changes ( < 4%) in
sedimentation velocity of pure gases re-
sulting from changes in either a gas (e.g.,
N, to air) or the temperature (23" to
37°C) or pressure.
The maximum deviation between the
observed and the predicted values is for
the gas mixtures 70%SF,-20%0,-10%N,
at 23°C and 80%He-20%0, at 37°C. It is
11% for 0.961-pm and 5% for 1S18-pm
aerosols.
The sedimentation velocity in 80%
He-20%0,, 70%SF,-20%0,-
1 0 % N 2 , 80%SF6-20%0,, 70%SF6-
20%0,-10%N, gases is within 11% of
that in air for the sizes and the tempera-
tures studied. In 80%Ar-20%0, it is
within 20.4% of that in air.
For most of the sedimentation veloci-
ties the relative standard deviation is in
the range 5%-lo%, the higher values be-
Gravitational Transport of Particles in Gases 175

TABLE 2. Scdirnentation Velocity of 0.961-prn Polystyrene Latex Particles in Different Gases

at 23°C and 37°C
--

Sed~mentattonVelocity Deviation Sedimentation Vclocity Deviation

at 23°C from at 37°C from
Observed (RSD) Predicted Predicted Observed (RSD) Predicted Predicted
Gas (~rns-I) ( ~ r n s ' ) (%) (pm s-') (Frn s ' ) ('%I
N2 + 0.21
0 2 + 1.45
Ar + 0.52
Hc - 0.44
CO, +1.37
SF6 + 2.36
Air - 0.85
80%He-20%0, + 11.12
70%1He-20%0,-1O%N, + 8.05
80%SF;,20%02 + 3.35
70%SF6-20960,-10%N2 +5.92
80%Ar-20%02 - 1.53
51.8%He-48.2%SF,
-
Observed (RSD) observed mean and (Relative standard deviation); particle density
to gravity = 9.81 m s-'.
= 1046.8 kg m " aceeelration due

ing for 0.961-pm particles. Table 3 also predicted values for the temperatures and
presents the ratio of the relative standard the sizes studied suggesting that the sedi-
deviation (Ratio RSD) of 0.961-pm and mentation cell is a very useful tool for the
1.516-pm particles at 23" and 37°C. measurement of the sedimentation veloc-
ity of aerosols.
The maximum observed deviation of
11% in helium gas mixtures and SF, gas
DISCUSSION mixtures cannot be explained. Some ideas
The observed values of sedimentation ve- for the explanation of the results are
locities of pure gases are within 4% of the brought out in following:
TABLE 3. Sedimentation Velocity of 1.518-pm Polystyrcnc Latex Particles in Different Gases
at 23°C and 37°C
Scdimentation Velocity Deviation Sedimentation Velocity Deviation
at 23°C from at 37°C from
Obscrved (RSD) Predicted Predicted Ratio Obscrved (RSD) Predicted Predicted Ratio
Gas (,urns') (pm s-') (%) RSD ( ~ r n s - ' ) ( ~ r n s ' ) (96) RSD

N2
0 2
Ar
He
C02
SF6
Air
80%He-20960,
70%He-20%0,-10%N,
80%SF6-20%02
70%SF6-20%02-10%N,
80%Ar-20%O,
Obaerved (RSD) = ohscrved mean and (relative standard deviation); ratio KSD = ratio of the relative standard deviation
of thc vclocitics of 0.961- and 1.518-prn particles.
176
The important parameters influencing
the sedimentation velocity, for a given
aerosol, are the gas density, particle den-
sity, particle size, acceleration due to grav-
ity, gas viscosity, and the slip correction
(Eq. 1).The gas and particle density, and
the acceleration due to gravity are accu-
rately known, hence they have negligible
contribution to the observed deviation.
The helium gas mixtures have higher vis-
cosities than any of their component gases
(Table 1). A higher viscosity results in
lower sedimentation velocity. Since the
calculated viscosity values are within 2%
of the experimental values (Turner et al.,
1989) and since SF6 mixture viscosities are
in between those of the component gases,
the small uncertainties in the viscosity val-
ues, if at all, cannot explain the observed
deviations. The slip correction, C(d), for a
given size depends on a ,3!, and y (mainly
a ) and A. a values for the gas mixtures
are not available in the literature. A value
of 1.27 for H e gas mixtures (close to 1.277
for He) and 1.207 for SF, gas mixtures, as
recommended by Rader (1990) for gases
whose a values are not known, has been
used. The small errors in a have smaller
effect on C(d) for He gas mixtures and no
effect on C ( d ) for SF, gas mixtures be-
cause of lower values of h (Eq. 5). For
example, for a = 1.207, C(d) = 1.O69 for
0.961-pm aerosols in 80%SF,-20%0, at
the standard pressure and at 23°C. A 10%
increase in the value of a results in C(d)
= 1.076, an increase of only 0.65%. Thus
small changes in a cannot account for the
deviations in these gas mixtures.
The relative humidity of the aerosol
after passing through the diffusion drier
was about 40%. This means that the water
vapor in the gas mixture was nearly 1.1%.
The viscosity of the water vapor at 23°C is
9.85 * 1 0 - 9 a s (Turner et al., 1989), a
value lower than that of other gases (Ta-
ble 1). This may change the value of the
viscosity of the mixture, when the pres-
ence of the water vapor is considered. The
S. K. Dua et al.
viscosity and mean free path of the
80%He-20%0, mixture containing 1.1%
water vapor were calculated using the Eqs.
7 and 11, respectively, treating the mix-
ture as a three component system. Their
values at 23°C work out to 2.118 * lo-' Pa
s and 0.0973 pm, respectively, compared
with 2.144* 1 0 - 9 a s and 0.1014 p m (Ta-
ble 1) when water vapor is not considered.
Use of these values gives the predicted
sedimentation velocity of 31.81 p m s-' as
compared with the observed value of 33.89
p m s-'. Now the deviation between the
observed and the predicted values is
6.54%, i.e., 1% less than of the case in
which water vapor is not considered. Sim-
ilar is the situation in 70%He-20%0,-
10%N2 mixture. For SF, gas mixtures the
viscosity of the gas mixtures containing
the water vapor remains practically the
same (difference < 0.15%) as without it.
So there is no influence of water vapor on
the sedimentation velocity in SF6 gas mix-
tures. Thus the presence of the water
vapor does not explain the higher ob-
served mean sedimentation velocities in
helium and sulfur hexafluoride gas mix-
tures.
The gas mixtures exhibiting maximum
deviation are composed of molecules that
have significantly different molecular
weights from each other. For example, the
molecular weight ratio of helium and of
oxygen in helium gas mixtures is 0.125
and that of sulfur hexafluoride and oxygen
in SF, gas mixtures is 4.564. The deviation
between the observed and the predicted
sedimentation velocities for these gas mix-
tures for 0.961-pm particles is between
3% and 11%. The deviation for this size is
between -1.5% and 2.7% in air and
80%Ar-20%0,, the molecular weight ra-
tios of whose molecules are 0.875 and
1.248, respectively. The molecular weight
ratio has a bearing on the mean molecu-
lar speed of the molecules in a gas mix-
ture (Eq. 12). The mean molecular speed
ratios of the gas mixtures to the main
Gravitational Transport of Particles in Gases
component of the pure gas in the mixture
a r e : 8 0 % H e - 2 0 % O , / H e = 0.871;
70%He-20%0,-10%N,/He = 0.818;
80%SF,-20%0,/ SF, = 1.227; 70%SF,-
20%0,-10%N,/SF, = 1.35; air/N, =
0.982 and 80%Ar-20%O,/Ar = 1.02. It is
observed that the mean molecular speed
ratios for He gas mixtures and SF, gas
mixtures to their main gas are signifi-
cantly different from that of N, gas mix-
ture (air) to N, or Ar gas mixture
(80%Ar-20%0,) to Ar, whose values are
close to unity. Does the mean molecular
speed play some additional role than what
appears in the value of h (Eq. 11)?
To test this an experiment was con-
ducted with 51.8%He-48.2%SF6. The
mean molecular speed ratios of this mix-
ture to He and SF, are 0.598 and 3.611,
respectively, the values significantly dif-
ferent from He gas mixtures and SF, gas
mixtures. The observed sedimentation ve-
locity for 0.961-pm particles in this gas
mixture was higher by 9% than the pre-
dicted sedimentation velocity, a deviation
of the same order as in He or SF, gas
mixtures. Thus the mean molecular speed
ratio cannot be the cause for the discrep-
ancy; if it were, the observed differences
between the observed and predicted val-
ues would be much higher in 51.8%He-
48.2%SF6 gas mixture.
Tables 2 and 3 show that 0.961-pm
particles have about 4% higher deviation
from the predicted values than 1.518-pm
particles have in 8 0 % H e - 2 0 % 0 , ,
70%He-20%0,-10%N,, 80%SF,-
20%0,, 70%SF,-20%0,-10%N,. Higher
slip correction is expected for small size
particles (Eq. 5). But the uncertainties in
the values of a cannot explain 4% addi-
tional difference in 0.961-pm particles.
Further SF, gas mixtures have small mean
free paths (Table 1) and 51.8%He-
48.2%SF6 still smaller (0.0166 p m at 23°C)
and hence small uncertainties in a have
practically no effect on the slip correction.
An experiment with 0.60-pm particles was
177
also conducted. In this case the observed
sedimentation velocity in 80%He-20%0,
was 8.48% higher than the predicted sedi-
mentation velocity, suggesting thereby that
the slip parameter a is not the cause for
the higher observed values in the gas mix-
tures. If a were the cause it would have
led to higher deviation for smaller size
particles.
Some additional experiments in air and
in 80%He-20%0, were conducted with
and without a charge neutralizer in aerosol
passage. There was no influence of the
charge neutralizer on the value of the
mean sedimentation velocity or the rela-
tive standard deviation.
The flushing time through the diffusion
drier and the sedimentation cell, to bring
the system at the gas atmosphere, was
nearly 40 min. For some of the experi-
ments, the diffusion drier was bypassed
and dilution air increased to attain nearly
the same relative humidity. The observed
sedimentation velocities were within 1.5%
of those with the diffusion drier suggest-
ing that the residence time in the diffu-
sion drier was enough to bring the system
to the gas atmosphere.
The relative standard deviations of the
particle diameter measured by microscope
was 2.4% for 0.961-pm particles and
1.8% for 1.518-pm particles. This corre-
sponds to nearly 6% standard deviation of
the sedimentation velocity for 0.961-pm
particles and 3% for 1.518-pm particles
from their mean values. The observed
relative standard deviations were in the
range 5%-lo%, the upper range being
for smaller size. The ratio of the pre-
dicted root mean square displacement
(J1.518 C(0.961)/(0.961 C(1.518)) ) for
0:961 to 1.518-pk particles due to the
Brownian motion ranges from 1.27 for SF,
to 1.35 for He (Fuchs, 1964). C(0.961) and
C(1.518) are the slip correction factors for
0.961 and 1.518-pm particles, respectively.
Table 3 gives the ratio of the observed
relative standard deviation (Ratio RSD)

of 0.961-1.518-pm particles. Although the
observed ratios of the RSD for some mea-
surements are within the range and RSD
values for 0.961-pm particles are higher
than for 1S18-pm particles as predicted,
the random process of the Brownian mo-
tion does not completely explain the ob-
served deviation from the predicted sedi-
mentation velocity.
CONCLUSION
For pure gases, air and 80%Ar-30%0,
the agreement between the observed and
the predicted sedimentation velocity val-
ues is very good for the temperatures and
the sizes at which measurements were
carried out. For helium gas mixtures and
sulfur hexafluoride gas mixtures the
agreement is fairly good.
The difference between the sedimenta-
tion velocity of aerosols in the 80%He-
20%0,, 70%He-20%0,-10%N,,
8 0 % S F 6 - 2 0 % 0 , , 70%SF6-20% 0,-
10%N, gases from that in air is small.
Hence, the reported differences in the
deposition of aerosols in lung (Heyder et
al., 19911, due to the differences in the
composition of the lung gas and the in-
spired gas, cannot be explained on the
basis of gravitational transport alone.
Other factors such as phoretic force and
fluid mechanical force (Briant and Lipp-
mann, 1993) may also influence the depo-
sition under such conditions.
The first author expresses h ~ sstneere gratitude to the
authorltles of GSF for the grant of the V ~ s ~ t ~Sc~en-
ng
S. K. Dua et al.
tist's Fellowship and Dr. P. K. Hopke for his interest in
the work.
REFERENCES
Allen, M. D., and Raabe, 0. G. (1985). Aerosol Sci.
Technol. 4:269-286.
Anderson, M., Svartengren, M., Philipson, K., and
Camner, P. (1988). J. Aerosol Sci. 19:1121-1124.
Beinert, T., Brand, P., Behr, J., Schulz, H.,
Schwaiblmair, M., Fruhmann, G., and I-Ieyder, J.
(1990). Eur. Respirat. J . 10:242.
Briant, J. K. (1990). J. Aerosol Med. 3:221-232.
Briant, J . K., and Lippmann, M. (1993). Aerosol Sci.
Technol. 19:27-39.
Davies, C. N. (1973). J. Aerosol Sci. 4:317-328.
Fuchs, N. A. (1964). The Mechanics oj'Aerosols. Dover
Publications, New York, p. 181.
Hcyder, J., Brand, P., Dua, S. K., Heilmann, P., and
Schulz, H. (1991). Intrapulmonary particle transport
by diffusiophoresis. Conference on inhaled parti-
cles, Edinburgh, U. K. Sept. 16-20.
Kreyling, W. G., Andre, S., Collier, C. G., Ferron,
G. A,, Metivier, H., and Schumann, G. (1991). J.
Aerosol Sci. 22509-535.
Reid, R. C., Prausnitz, J. M., and Sherwood, T. K.
(1977). The Properties of Gases and liquid.^, 3rd ed.
McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 391-469.
Rader, D. J. (1990). J. Aerosol Sci. 21:161-168.
Stahlhofen, W., Armbruster, I., Gebhart, J., and Grein,
E. (1975). Atrnos. Enuiron. 9:851-857.
Svartengren, M., Anderson, M., Philipson, K., and
Camner, P. (19891, Exp. Lung Res. 15:575-585.
Swift, D. L., Caprin, J. C., and Mitzner, W. (1982).
Ann. Occup. Hyg. 26:109-117.
Turner, M. J., MacLeod, I. M., and Rothberg, A. D.
(1989). J. Appl. I'hysiol. 67:472-477.
Weast, R. C. Lide, D. R., Astle, M. J., and Bayer, W. H.
(1989-1990). Handbook oj' Chernisly and Physics,
70th ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Willeke, K. (1976). J. Aerosol Sci. 7:381-387.