Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search

Search Results

Comparison of lead and tin concentrations in air at a solder manufacturer from the closed-face 37-mm cassette with and without a custom cellulose-acetate cassette insert.

Authors
Lee-EG; Chisholm-WP; Burns-DA; Nelson-JH; Kashon-ML; Harper-M
Source
J Occup Environ Hyg 2014 Dec; 11(12):819-825
NIOSHTIC No.
20044357
Abstract
A polyvinyl chloride (PVC) cassette insert with PVC filter (ACCU-CAP) in a 37-mm closed -face cassette (CFC) was designed for gravimetric analysis. A customized version of the ACCU-CAP, also to be used in the CFC, was manufactured from an acid-digestible cellulose-acetate cassette insert joined to a mixed cellulose ester (MCE) filter for wet chemical analysis. The aim of this study was to compare metal particle concentrations as sampled by the customized insert (CI) in a CFC sampler with the traditional sampling method using only a MCE filter in the CFC. Thirty-nine personal and 13 area samples were taken using paired filter-based CFC and the CI in CFC samplers at a solder manufacturing plant. The CI was removed from its CFC, digested and analyzed as a whole. The MCE filter from the typical CFC was removed for analysis and then the interior of the cassette was wiped with Ghost Wipe for a separate analysis. The MCE filter only, Ghost Wipe, and CI were separately dissolved in heated nitric acid for ICP-MS analysis. Overall, the geometric mean concentration of the filter-only (FO) samples was considerably lower than that of the CI samples, by 53% for lead and 32% for tin. However, if the FO analysis was added to the corresponding Ghost Wipe analysis, i.e., filter+interior wipe (FW), the geometric mean concentrations of the FW results were similar to those of the CI results (by 113% for lead and 98% for tin). For both lead and tin the comparison of (log-transformed) metal concentrations between the FW and CI results showed no statistically significant difference (p-value=0.3009 for lead and 0.800 for tin), while the comparison between the FO and CI results shows statistically significant differences (all p-values<0.05). In conclusion, incorporating the sampler internal non-filter deposits by wiping or use of an internal filter capsule gave higher results than analyzing only the filter. Close agreement between the two methods of including non-filter deposits is an indication of general equivalency.
Keywords
Sampling; Sampling-equipment; Exposure-limits; Exposure-levels; Analytical-processes; Chemical-analysis; Chemical-composition; Chemical-properties; Metal-compounds; Metallic-compounds; Particulates; Filters; Author Keywords: Aerosol sampling; CFC sampler; Internal filter capsule; Metals; Solu-CAP; Solu-Sert
Contact
Eun Gyung Lee, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Health Effects Laboratory Division, Exposure Assessment Branch, 1095 Willowdale Road, Morgantown, WV 26505
CODEN
JOEHA2
CAS No.
7439-92-1; 7440-31-5
Publication Date
20141201
Document Type
Journal Article
Email Address
dtq5@cdc.gov
Fiscal Year
2015
NTIS Accession No.
NTIS Price
Identifying No.
M052014
Issue of Publication
12
ISSN
1545-9624
NIOSH Division
HELD; DRDS
Priority Area
Manufacturing
Source Name
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
State
WV
TOP