In-depth survey report: a laboratory comparison of conventional drywall sanding techniques versus commercially available controls at The Seattle-Area Apprenticeship Training Facility, The International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades, Seattle Washington.
Mead KR; Fischbach TJ; Kovein RJ
Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, ECTB 208-11a, 1995 Jun; :1-104
This study examined various drywall sanding techniques to evaluate commercially available sanding controls and compare their exposure potential with traditional noncontrolled drywall sanding methods. Five off the shelf controlled sanding methods, including three pole sanding controls and two hand sanding controls, were compared with conventional dry sanding techniques. A light scattering particle detector mounted near the worker's breathing zone was used to log exposure comparisons. Forty three test runs were conducted within six sanding booths. Mean exposures to airborne particulate were reduced by 80 to 97% with each of the engineering control designs. Conventional pole sanding exposures averaged almost 45% less than conventional hand sanding exposures. The workers indicated that some of the tools lacked sanding head flexibility and/or stability and some were over priced. The authors conclude that engineering controls which dramatically reduce worker exposure to dust generated during the sanding of drywalls are available in the market place, but that the acceptance and use of these techniques may require improved tool design and lowered equipment costs.
NIOSH-Author; NIOSH-Survey; Field-Study; Region-10; Control-technology; Dust-inhalation; Dust-exposure; Airborne-dusts; Construction-materials; Construction-industry; Hand-tools
Field Studies; Control Technology
NTIS Accession No.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health