Conexiant
Login
  • The Analytical Scientist
  • The Cannabis Scientist
  • The Medicine Maker
  • The Ophthalmologist
  • The Pathologist
  • The Traditional Scientist
The Analytical Scientist
  • Explore

    Explore

    • Latest
    • News & Research
    • Trends & Challenges
    • Keynote Interviews
    • Opinion & Personal Narratives
    • Product Profiles
    • App Notes

    Featured Topics

    • Mass Spectrometry
    • Chromatography
    • Spectroscopy

    Issues

    • Latest Issue
    • Archive
  • Topics

    Techniques & Tools

    • Mass Spectrometry
    • Chromatography
    • Spectroscopy
    • Microscopy
    • Sensors
    • Data & AI

    • View All Topics

    Applications & Fields

    • Clinical
    • Environmental
    • Food, Beverage & Agriculture
    • Pharma & Biopharma
    • Omics
    • Forensics
  • People & Profiles

    People & Profiles

    • Power List
    • Voices in the Community
    • Sitting Down With
    • Authors & Contributors
  • Business & Education

    Business & Education

    • Innovation
    • Business & Entrepreneurship
    • Career Pathways
  • Events
    • Live Events
    • Webinars
  • Multimedia
    • Video
Subscribe
Subscribe

False

The Analytical Scientist / Issues / 2016 / Feb / End of the Road
Mass Spectrometry Sample Preparation Materials Science Chromatography Gas Chromatography

End of the Road

Researchers use SPME and GC-MS to puncture claims that banned tire treatments are “undetectable”

By James Strachan 02/03/2016 1 min read

Share

When cornering at break-neck speeds, every bit of friction counts – and tire-softening agents can enhance grip, improve handling and shave precious milliseconds off lap times. But they are also prohibited in competition. Stopping the cheaters in their tracks, researchers from the Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) have developed a method to identify the banned tire softeners. Over the course of a year, the researchers tested 71 real tire samples from competitors in the United States Auto Club – 10 contained banned substances (1). “The results weren’t all that surprising to us,” says William Kretz, lead author of the study, “But I think a lot of the people these products are marketed to might be surprised to find out how easily the treatments they apply to their tires can be detected and even identified. The companies that sell these treatments give their patrons a false sense of security in order to convince them to buy more merchandise. In actuality, it isn’t difficult to detect these illicit treatments, if the tires are kept in a suitable environment and submitted for laboratory testing in a timely manner, the treatments show up clear as day.”

The team used solid phase microextraction (SPME) ahead of GC-MS. “The first advantage of SPME was its sensitivity. By pre-concentrating the analyte on the fiber surface, we were able to see tire treatments at lower detection limits than what liquid injection would permit,” says Kretz. “The second advantage was the lack of sample work-up. Because we were looking at the volatile compounds coming off the tire rubber itself, we didn’t need to do a liquid extraction. We were able to analyze the tires directly, avoiding arduous preparation steps and losses due to partitioning, and so on.” Kretz believes the new method will help professional racing by providing critical information to race administrators, and thus enabling them to take corrective or disciplinary action against individuals who violate the rules. “It helps ensure the events are fair and contributes to the overall integrity of the sport,” he says.

Newsletters

Receive the latest analytical science news, personalities, education, and career development – weekly to your inbox.

Newsletter Signup Image

References

  1. W Kretz, C Carroll and JV Goodpaster, “Detection of prohibited treatment products on racing tires using headspace solid phase microextraction (SPME) and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)”, Anal Methods, 8, 177-182 (2016). DOI: 10.1039/C5AY02657A

About the Author(s)

James Strachan

Over the course of my Biomedical Sciences degree it dawned on me that my goal of becoming a scientist didn’t quite mesh with my lack of affinity for lab work. Thinking on my decision to pursue biology rather than English at age 15 – despite an aptitude for the latter – I realized that science writing was a way to combine what I loved with what I was good at. From there I set out to gather as much freelancing experience as I could, spending 2 years developing scientific content for International Innovation, before completing an MSc in Science Communication. After gaining invaluable experience in supporting the communications efforts of CERN and IN-PART, I joined Texere – where I am focused on producing consistently engaging, cutting-edge and innovative content for our specialist audiences around the world.

More Articles by James Strachan

False

Advertisement

Recommended

False

False

The Analytical Scientist
Subscribe

About

  • About Us
  • Work at Conexiant Europe
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Copyright © 2025 Texere Publishing Limited (trading as Conexiant), with registered number 08113419 whose registered office is at Booths No. 1, Booths Park, Chelford Road, Knutsford, England, WA16 8GS.