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

A comparison of the closed-face cassette at different orientations while measuring total particles.

Authors
Cook-DM; Sleeth-DK; Thiese-MS; Larson-RR
Source
J Occup Environ Hyg 2015 Mar; 12(3):199-204
NIOSHTIC No.
20045286
Abstract
The current method for sampling aerosols using the 37-mm closed-face cassette (CFC) sampler is based on the orientation of the cassette at approximately 45 degrees from horizontal. There is some concern as to whether this method is appropriate and may be underestimating exposures. An alternative orientation at approximately 0 degree (horizontal) has been discussed. This research compared the CFC's orientation at 45 degrees from horizontal to the proposed orientation at horizontal, 0 degree in a controlled laboratory setting. The particles used in this study were fused alumina oxide in four sizes, approximately 9.5 microm, 12.8 microm, 18 microm, and 44.3 microm in aerodynamic diameter. For each test, one aerosol was dispersed in a wind tunnel operating at 0.2 m/s with samplers mounted in the breathing zone of a rotating mannequin. A sampling event consisted of four pairs of samplers, placed side by side (one pair at 45 degrees and another at 0 degree cassette orientation), and exposed for a period of 45 minutes. A total of twelve sampling events, three sample events per particle size, were conducted with a total of ninety-four samples collected. Mass concentration measurements were compared to assess the relationship between the sampler orientations of the cassettes. In addition, the relationship between the mass collected on the cassette filter and on the interior walls of the cassette was also assessed. The results indicated that there was no significant difference between the measured concentrations based on the orientation of the CFC's. The amount of mass collected on the interior walls of the cassettes were relatively low (<5%) compared to expected (up to 100%) wall losses for both orientations.
Keywords
Sampling-methods; Particulate-sampling-methods; Particulates; Samplers; Aerosol-particles; Aerosol-sampling; Analytical-instruments; Exposure-assessment; Air-sampling-equipment; Equipment-reliability; Laboratory-testing; Particle-aerodynamics; Breathing-zone; Filters; Analytical-processes; Author Keywords: aerosol; closed-face cassette; particles; sampler orientation; wind tunnel
Contact
Darrah K. Sleeth, Rocky Mountain Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, 391 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA
CODEN
JOEHA2
Publication Date
20150301
Document Type
Journal Article
Email Address
darrah.sleeth@hsc.utah.edu
Funding Type
Grant
Fiscal Year
2015
NTIS Accession No.
NTIS Price
Identifying No.
Grant-Number-T42-OH-008414; M102014
Issue of Publication
3
ISSN
1545-9624
Source Name
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
State
UT
Performing Organization
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
TOP