Studying factors affecting yields of toxic compounds in smoke of products made of smoking fine cut tobacco

Materials and Methods

Researches on fine cut tobacco and products made of it are carried in FSBSI ARSRITTP at present moment. These researches are directed on studying technological properties of fine cut tobacco and chemical composition of smoke of final products. It is worth mentioning that at present time State regulation of toxic compounds contents in the smoke of products made of fine cut tobacco are absent. This is complicated factor for elaborating products with decreased toxicity, desired consumers’ properties and technologies for their manufacturing. So further complex studies of this type of smoking product have significant scientific and practical interest and are prospective and actual.

Fine cut tobacco is utilized for making smoking product manually by inserting tobacco into ready cigarette plug or wrapping tobacco portion by special paper. Contents of toxic compounds in the smoke of products made of fine cut tobacco are affected by product construction (mass, diameter), composition of smoking tobacco and paper for its making [1].

Tobacco sorts with different taste and aroma properties and chemical composition were chosen for the research. They are: Virginia Gold, Burley, Immuniy 580 and tobacco blend made of these sorts in ratio 50:25:25.

Standard methods adopted for tobacco industry were utilized for carried researches [2–10]:

– measuring cut width according to GOST 33789–2016 (ISO 20193:2012) “Tobacco and tobacco products. Determination of the width of the strands of cut tobacco” [2];

– sampling according to GOST R 53976–2010 (ISO 15592–1:2001) “Fine cut smoking tobacco and smoking articles made of it. Part 1: Sampling” [3];

– conditioning and testing under certain air conditions according to GOST 32795–2014 (ISO 15592–2:2001) “Fine cut smoking tobacco and smoking articles made of it. Methods for sampling, conditioning and analysis. Part 2: Atmosphere for conditioning and testing” [4];

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

– machine smoking of products according to international standard ISO 15592–3:2008 “Fine-cut tobacco and smoking articles made from it. Methods of sampling, conditioning and analysis. Part 3: Determination of total particulate matter of smoking articles using a routine analytical smoking machine, preparation for the determination of water and nicotine, and calculation of nicotine-free dry particulate matter” [5];

– measuring air permeability of cigarette paper according to GOST R 51295–2014 (ISO 2965:2009) “Cigarette paper, paper for filter wrapping and tipping paper including paper with separate or oriented perforated zone and paper with lines of different air permeability. Measuring air permeability” [6];

– tar defining according to GOST 30571– 2003 (ISO 4387:2000) / GOST R 51976–2002 (ISO 4387:2000) “Cigarettes. Determination of total and nicotine-free dry particulate matter using a routine analytical smoking machine” [7];

– nicotine defining according to GOST 30570–2015 (ISO 10315:2013) “Cigarettes. Determination of nicotine in smoke condensates. Gas-chromatographic method” [8];

– water defining according to GOST 30622.1–2003 (ISO 10362–1:1999) “Cigarettes. Determination of water in total particulate matter from the mainstream smoke. Part 1: Gas-chromatographic method” [9].

Results

At first stage of the research technological properties, chemical composition and tasting of each sample were carried. Experimental results on technological properties of fine cut smoking tobacco are presented in table 1.

Table 1.

Technological properties of different samples of fine cut smoking tobacco

Tobacco (blend) name	Water content, %	Weight content, %		Width of the strands, mm	Tasting, points
		strand	dust
Virginia Gold	17,67	78,42	0,36	0,8	72,4
Burley	19,78	77,90	0,24	0,8	63,1
Immuniy 580	19,67	76,26	0,38	0,8	62,7
Tobacco blend	18,49	76,80	0,40	0,8	70,5

As table 1 shows tobacco of Virginia Gold sort has maximum output of strand – 78.42% and high tasting score – 72.4 points.

The lowest strand output and tasting score has the tobacco of Immuniy 580 sort.

Table 2.

Chemical composition of cured tobacco

Tobacco (blend) name	Nicotine, %	Carbohydrates, %	Proteins, %	рН
Virginia Gold	0,6	18,6	5,7	5,5
Burley	1,3	1,4	9,1	6,3
Immuniy 580	1,2	3,4	9,2	5,5
Tobacco blend	0,9	11,5	7,8	5,6

During further studies for defining effect of product construction and paper air permeability samples of products were made of fine cut tobacco manually by special device consisting of plastic body two rollers and flexible belt. According to international standard ISO 15592–3 each type of smoking product was made with mass 400 mg (diameter 5.2 mm) and 750 mg (diameter 7.2 mm) utilizing paper of two types: A (OCB Premium on the base of rice with air permeability 10 CU) and B (OCB Organic Hemp on the base of cannabis with air permeability 3 CU) [10].

Table 3.

Chemical composition of products’ smoke with different constructions made of fine cut tobacco

Tobacco (blend) name	Width of the strands, mm	Sample №	Diameter, mm	Mass, mg	Paper type	Nicotine, mg/sample	Tar, mg/sample
Virginia Gold	0,8	1	5,2	400	А	0,70	31,24
		2	5,2	400	В	0,67	33,07
		3	7,2	750	А	0,95	42,93
		4	7,2	750	В	1,11	44,89
Burley	0,8	5	5,2	400	А	1,28	29,88
		6	5,2	400	В	1,37	29,49
		7	7,2	750	А	1,86	40,93
		8	7,2	750	В	1,92	42,38
Immuniy 580	0,8	9	5,2	400	А	1,01	20,85
		10	5,2	400	В	1,08	23,67
		11	7,2	750	А	1,60	33,69
		12	7,2	750	В	1,68	32,69
Tobacco blend	0,8	13	5,2	400	А	0,94	28,55
		14	5,2	400	В	1,08	29,51
		15	7,2	750	А	1,48	40,05
		16	7,2	750	В	1,42	41,27

As table 3 shows samples of same diameter but with different paper types and air permeability nicotine and tar content is different. Sample 1 with 5.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 2 with same diameter and B type paper has 4.5% higher nicotine content and 5.8% lower tar content. Sample 3 with 7.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 4 with same diameter and B type paper has 16% lower nicotine content and 4.5% lower tar content. Sample 5 with 5.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 6 with same diameter and B type paper has 7% lower nicotine content and 1.4% higher tar content. Sample 7 with 7.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 8 with same diameter and B type paper has 3.2% lower nicotine content and 3.5% lower tar content. Sample 9 with 5.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 10 with same diameter and B type paper has 6.9% higher nicotine content and 13.5% lower tar content. Sample 11 with 7.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 12 with same diameter and B type paper has 5% lower nicotine content and 3.1% higher tar content. Sample 13 with 5.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 14 with same diameter and B type paper has 15% lower nicotine content and 3.3% lower tar content. Sample 15 with 7.2 mm diameter and A type paper compared to sample 16 with same diameter and B type paper has 4.2% higher nicotine content and 3% lower tar content.

Results of cigarette formats (diameters) comparison utilizing same paper types are presented below. Sample 1 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 3 with 7.2 mm diameter has 26.3% lower nicotine content and 27.2% lower tar content. Sample 2 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 4 with 7.2 mm diameter has 39.6% lower nicotine content and 26.3% lower tar content. Sample 5 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 7 with 7.2 mm diameter has 31.2% lower nicotine content and 26.9% lower tar content. Sample 6 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 8 with 7.2 mm diameter has 28.6% lower nicotine content and 30.4% lower tar content. Sample 9 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 11 with 7.2 mm diameter has 36.9% lower nicotine content and 38.1% lower tar content. Sample 10 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 12 with 7.2 mm diameter has 35.7% lower nicotine content and 27.6% lower tar content. Sample 13 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 15 with 7.2 mm diameter has 36.5% lower nicotine content and 28.7% lower tar content. Sample 14 with 5.2 mm diameter compared to sample 16 with 7.2 mm diameter has 23.9% lower nicotine content and 28.5% lower tar content.

Discussion

Construction of smoking product (paper and filter) has the most significant effect on toxic compounds (tar and nicotine) content. Researches carried earlier [1] don’t take into account strength (nicotine content) of tobacco blend and its further correspondence with nicotine content in the smoke of products.

Data obtained after carried research prove effect of product construction (diameter and air permeability of paper) on tar and nicotine content in the smoke of products made of fine cut smoking tobacco. Not only product construction but also composition of tobacco blend (nicotine content) affects on content of toxic compounds in the smoke.

Conclusion

Carried researches allow making the following conclusions:

• 1.    Tobacco blend composition, product mass and diameter, paper characteristics affect toxic compounds content in the smoke of fine cut smoking tobacco.

• 2.    Utilizing paper A (OCB premium on the base of rice with air permeability 10 CU) with higher air permeability for making product from smoking tobacco leads to 16% nicotine and 13.5% tar content decreasing in the smoke compared to products made of paper B (OCB Organic Hemp on the base of cannabis with air permeability 3 CU).

• 3.    Decreasing product diameter from 7.2 to 5.2 mm and mass from 750 to 400 mg leads to 39.6% decreasing nicotine and 38.1% decreasing tar contents.

• 4.    In order to decrease toxic impact on consumers we recommend manufacturing products made of fine cut tobacco with mass 400 mg, 5.2 mm diameter utilizing paper with air permeability not lower than 10 CU.