Tobacco Documents Online

PHILIP' MOPA~IS U. S. A. INTER--OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE, Richmond, Virginia To : From:: Subject : • Dr. E. B. Sanders • w. E. Claflin Date: March 20, 1989 (Reilssued April 5, 1989) • LOW S~ESTRE~M SUBJECTIVE-ANALYTICAL, PLAN, INTRODUCTION FO{ the past several years, there has been an extensive program, to develop products that are significantly reduced in v~s£ble sidestream smoke. From the start, these product have had serious subjective shortcomings. These product defects are generally characterized by the smoAers as being~ in the area of mouthcoating~, astringent, bland and specific off flavors. As the program has progressed, improvement in the products has been achieved basically by trial and, error rearrangement of the product. The major ~nprovements have b~en in the area of blend and paper optimization and to a lesser extent tar and puff count control and flavor and filter system selection. The products, while markedly improved over earlier ones, still have a ways to go before being fully co~)etitive. A s~bjective and analytical study has been designed to help guide future changes in a more directexl a~d scientific way. The plan is to fully characterize current (better) and past (worse) products subjectively and analytically to correlate specific subjective improvements, along~ with the cigarette design, changes, to changes in smoke chemical or physical properties. ORGANIZATION To in~plem~ent the study, a working group has been for~ed from personnel in all concerned areas of R&D. The men~ers are W. Claflin, Chairman; M. Jeltema, Product Evaluation; R. Hale, Flavor Development; R. Comes, Chem/cal Kesearch~; R. K~nser, Biochemical Research; C. Kroustalis, Analytical Research~; B. Goochnan, Cigarette Technology; L. W~, Product Development; and W. Dwyer, Physical Research. The group has met a number of times, both collectively and in sub-groups, to define the scope of the program. The overa~l program, fs set to get underway as soon as the selected models have been produced. ~hese models are as follows:

General Specifications: Reg. Circumference (24.8 mm) I00 mm Long ~SaNe Tar~Puff (Total ~ar and Puff Count AS Close As Possible), Controls: Paper Blend 1 Marlboro Marlboro CA 2 Marlboro 21 CA Filter Test I:: 3 35% Mg(OH) 2 Marlboro CA 4 35% Mg(OH)~ 2I CA Test 2: 5 Double Wrap Marlboro CA KC CaC0~ Outer PDM Inner 6 Double Wrap 2I CA KC CaC03 Outer PDM Inner As can be seen, our two most investlgatedi 3idestream reduction paper systent~ will be tested. Neither tastes like the control, and: they taste d~fferent from each other. Repeated testing has shown that these papers are better subjectively with the 2I blend than the Marlboro. The cigarettes have thus been designed based upon developmental work that has shown positive subjective changes. The cigarettes are expected to be n~de during the 2ndl week ~f April. After making, the cigarettes will be tested as follows: (i) Initial physical and analytical confirmation -Inunediate remake if too far from design (2) Subjective screening - OC sidestream panel - Assure that significant gross subjective differences are present -2-

Upon completion of (I) and (2), the major program will get underway with all phases being done concurrently. Cigarette Preparation - Selection, screening for immediate use - Canning for retained storage PED Subjectives - Protocol by M. Jel£ema. Regular smoking as well as mainstream gas phase and possibly sidestream odor Complete C.I. - Routine andl non-routine Analytical Testing - Protocol by C. Kroustalis. MetaLs (metaLLic taste), carbonyls, phosphorus, sugars, nitrate nitrogen, soluble ammonia, phenols, benzene, toluene, etc. Chemical Research - Protocol by R. Comes. Semivolatile and gas phase profiles, visibility, sidestream particulate mass studies, aerosol studies, neutron, activation and, radiography, etc. Obviously, as the program proceeds, much, of the contfnued testing will depend on preceding results. INTERPRETATION& IMPLEMENTATION OF RESULTS As' stated, the overall goal of the program is to tie together subjective qualities with specific physical and chemical differences between the cigarettes. The role of the working group, willLbe tO analyze the data from, all sources to provide these correlations. As relatlonsh~ps are uncovered, they shomld provide meaningful direction for system changes to achieve:improved smoking products. Mr. R.. A. Comes Dr. R. W,. Dwyer Ms. B. L. Goodman Mr. R. W'. Hale Dr. M. A. Jeltema: Ms. R. D. K~nser Mr. C. $. Kroustalis Dr. L. S. Wu -3-

SMOKING PROTOCOL A. Smoke All 1,2 Models Once B. Smoke 4 Model's Second Time C. Smoke All Model!3 FOr Gas Phase D. Repeat A & B M. JELTEMA

FTC Ta+r Nicotine Water Puff Count Total Alkalo~ds Total Reducing Sugars B. MAIT ROUTINE CI . OqO Physical Parameters Length Circumference Paper Porosity (Coresta) Dbl. Wrap - Together Dbl. Wrap,- Separate Fi~ter Length - ]9 Filter Weight Ventilation • ~[O Tobacco Weight

NON-ROUTINE CI' Coal Temperature (Static Andl Dynamic Peak) Plasticizers Recon, ES, ET Filter Efficiency Filler Rod TPM Static Bur. Ti~ Filter Carbon Weight Hmmectan~s Gas Phase - CO, NO, HCN, Total Aldehydes Smoke Index (Reduction In Gas Phase From Carbon, Filters) B'. MAIT

NON-ROUTINE - ARD Metals Carbonyls Phosphorous - Paper, Filler, Smoke Toluene, Phenols Individual Sugars Nitrate Nitrogen Soluble Ammonia - MS • SS C. KROUSTALIS

NON-ROUTINE, - CHEMICAL RESEARCH VisibiLity NAA - Paper + Smoke - Emphasis on Mg, Ca, and P Chamber Coresta - $S TPM Neutron Radiography Sch~ieren Smoke Aero3o~ - Mainstream & Sfdestream - Mass, Particle Size Distribution~ Particle Number 14'C - Utilizes Task Force Papers With Labelled Filler R. COMES