Kerrie A Burton, Jane L Whitelaw, Alison L Jones, Brian Davies
{"title":"Efficiency of Respirator Filter Media against Diesel Particulate Matter: A Comparison Study Using Two Diesel Particulate Sources.","authors":"Kerrie A Burton, Jane L Whitelaw, Alison L Jones, Brian Davies","doi":"10.1093/annhyg/mew026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Diesel engines have been a mainstay within many industries since the early 1900s. Exposure to diesel particulate matter (DPM) is a major issue in many industrial workplaces given the potential for serious health impacts to exposed workers; including the potential for lung cancer and adverse irritant and cardiovascular effects. Personal respiratory protective devices are an accepted safety measure to mitigate worker exposure against the potentially damaging health impacts of DPM. To be protective, they need to act as effective filters against carbon and other particulates. In Australia, the filtering efficiency of respiratory protective devices is determined by challenging test filter media with aerosolised sodium chloride to determine penetration at designated flow rates. The methodology outlined in AS/NZS1716 (Standards Australia International Ltd and Standards New Zealand 2012. Respiratory protective devices. Sydney/Wellington: SAI Global Limited/Standards New Zealand) does not account for the differences between characteristics of workplace contaminants like DPM and sodium chloride such as structure, composition, and particle size. This study examined filtering efficiency for three commonly used AS/NZS certified respirator filter models, challenging them with two types of diesel emissions; those from a diesel generator and a diesel engine. Penetration through the filter media of elemental carbon (EC), total carbon (TC), and total suspended particulate (TSP) was calculated. Results indicate that filtering efficiency assumed by P2 certification in Australia was achieved for two of the three respirator models for DPM generated using the small diesel generator, whilst when the larger diesel engine was used, filtering efficiency requirements were met for all three filter models. These results suggest that the testing methodology specified for certification of personal respiratory protective devices by Standards Australia may not ensure adequate protection for respirator users against DPM under all circumstances of diesel generated particles. </p>","PeriodicalId":8458,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/annhyg/mew026","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mew026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/5/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
Diesel engines have been a mainstay within many industries since the early 1900s. Exposure to diesel particulate matter (DPM) is a major issue in many industrial workplaces given the potential for serious health impacts to exposed workers; including the potential for lung cancer and adverse irritant and cardiovascular effects. Personal respiratory protective devices are an accepted safety measure to mitigate worker exposure against the potentially damaging health impacts of DPM. To be protective, they need to act as effective filters against carbon and other particulates. In Australia, the filtering efficiency of respiratory protective devices is determined by challenging test filter media with aerosolised sodium chloride to determine penetration at designated flow rates. The methodology outlined in AS/NZS1716 (Standards Australia International Ltd and Standards New Zealand 2012. Respiratory protective devices. Sydney/Wellington: SAI Global Limited/Standards New Zealand) does not account for the differences between characteristics of workplace contaminants like DPM and sodium chloride such as structure, composition, and particle size. This study examined filtering efficiency for three commonly used AS/NZS certified respirator filter models, challenging them with two types of diesel emissions; those from a diesel generator and a diesel engine. Penetration through the filter media of elemental carbon (EC), total carbon (TC), and total suspended particulate (TSP) was calculated. Results indicate that filtering efficiency assumed by P2 certification in Australia was achieved for two of the three respirator models for DPM generated using the small diesel generator, whilst when the larger diesel engine was used, filtering efficiency requirements were met for all three filter models. These results suggest that the testing methodology specified for certification of personal respiratory protective devices by Standards Australia may not ensure adequate protection for respirator users against DPM under all circumstances of diesel generated particles.
自20世纪初以来,柴油发动机一直是许多行业的支柱。暴露于柴油颗粒物(DPM)是许多工业工作场所的一个主要问题,因为它可能对暴露的工人的健康造成严重影响;包括潜在的肺癌和不良刺激和心血管影响。个人呼吸防护装置是一种公认的安全措施,可减轻工人接触DPM对健康的潜在破坏性影响。为了起到保护作用,它们需要有效地过滤碳和其他颗粒物。在澳大利亚,呼吸保护装置的过滤效率是通过使用雾化氯化钠测试过滤介质来确定在指定流速下的渗透性来确定的。方法概述在AS/NZS1716(澳大利亚国际标准有限公司和新西兰标准2012)中。呼吸保护装置。悉尼/惠灵顿:SAI Global Limited/Standards New Zealand)没有考虑到DPM和氯化钠等工作场所污染物的结构、成分和粒径等特征之间的差异。本研究检查了三种常用的AS/NZS认证呼吸器过滤器模型的过滤效率,并对两种类型的柴油排放进行了挑战;它们来自柴油发电机和柴油发动机。计算了元素碳(EC)、总碳(TC)和总悬浮颗粒物(TSP)在过滤介质中的渗透率。结果表明,对于使用小型柴油发电机产生的DPM,三种型号的呼吸器中有两种达到了澳大利亚P2认证的过滤效率,而当使用大型柴油发电机时,三种型号的过滤效率都达到了要求。这些结果表明,澳大利亚标准协会为个人呼吸防护装置认证指定的测试方法可能无法确保呼吸器使用者在柴油产生的颗粒的所有情况下对DPM有足够的保护。