Comparison of Nanoparticle Exposure Levels Based on Facility Type—Small-Scale Laboratories, Large-Scale Manufacturing Workplaces, and Unintended Nanoparticle-Emitting Workplaces

BackgroundRelationships among portable scanning mobility particle sizer (P-SMPS), condensation particle counter (CPC), and surface area monitor (SAM), which are different metric measurement devices, were investigated, and two widely used research grade (RG)-SMPSs were compared to harmonize the measurement protocols.MethodsPearson correlation analysis was performed to compare the relation between P-SMPS, CPC, and SAM and two common RG-SMPS.ResultsFor laboratory and engineered nanoparticle (ENP) workplaces, correlation among devices showed good relationships. Correlation among devices was fair in unintended nanoparticle (UNP)-emitting workplaces. This is partly explained by the fact that shape of particles was not spherical, although calibration of sampling instruments was performed using spherical particles and the concentration was very high at the UNP workplaces to allow them to aggregate more easily. Chain-like particles were found by scanning electron microscope in UNP workplaces. The CPC or SAM could be used as an alternative instrument instead of SMPS at the ENP-handling workplaces. At the UNP workplaces, where concentration is high, real-time instruments should be used with caution. There are significant differences between the two SMPSs tested. TSI SMPS showed about 20% higher concentration than the Grimm SMPS in all workplaces.ConclusionsFor nanoparticle measurement, CPC and SAM might be useful to find source of emission at laboratory and ENP workplaces instead of P-SMPS in the first stage. An SMPS is required to measure with high accuracy. Caution is necessary when comparing data from different nanoparticle measurement devices and RG-SMPSs.

show abstract

“…2C), which may result in errors. An SEM image could be useful to find the characteristics of nanoparticles at workplaces [4], [20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Real Time Nanoparticle Monitoring Instruments in the Workplaces

Ham

Lee

Eom

et al. 2016

Safety and Health at Work

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(10)(11)(12) This work has undoubtedly helped to improve the occupational safety in nanotechnology industries. (13) However, the INPs generated in many occupations are not fully understood. Welding is one of the processes that generate high levels of INPs that are known to contain mostly iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn) oxides, among many other metals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Size, composition, morphology, and health implications of airborne incidental metal-containing nanoparticles

Gonzalez‐Pech

Stebounova

Ustunol

et al. 2019

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is great concern in the adverse health implications of engineered nanoparticles. However, there are many circumstances where the production of incidental nanoparticles, i.e., nanoparticles unintentionally generated as a side product of some anthropogenic process, is of even greater concern. In this study, metal-based incidental nanoparticles were measured in two occupational settings: a machining center and a foundry. On-site characterization of substrate-deposited incidental nanoparticles using a field-portable X-ray fluorescence provided some insights into the chemical characteristics of these metal-containing particles. The same substrates were then used to carry out further off-site analysis including single particle analysis using scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Between the two sites, there were similarities in the size and composition of the incidental nanoparticles as well as in the agglomeration and coagulation behavior of nanoparticles. In particular, incidental nanoparticles were identified in two forms: sub-micrometer fractal-like agglomerates from activities such as welding and super-micrometer particles with incidental nanoparticles coagulated to their surface, herein referenced as nanoparticle collectors. These agglomerates will affect deposition and transport inside the respiratory system of the respirable incidental nanoparticles and the corresponding health implications. The studies of incidental nanoparticles generated in occupational settings lay the groundwork on which occupational health and safety protocols should be built.

show abstract

“…Weighing was performed using a high-speed microbalance with a readability of 1 µg (XP6; Mettler Toledo, Columbus, OH, USA). For SEM analysis, the open-face sampling technique was used (Ham et al, 2015). The PC filter for SEM analysis was cut randomly because it was assumed that particles were evenly distributed on the filter.…”

Section: Air Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arsenic Exposure during Preventive Maintenance of an Ion Implanter in a Semiconductor Manufacturing Factory

Ham

Yoon

Kim

et al. 2017

Aerosol Air Qual. Res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Workers in the semiconductor fabrication process may be exposed to higher levels of hazardous materials, such as arsenic, during preventive maintenance (PM) tasks than during the regular operation of the fabrication process. This study investigates the exposure to arsenic and other metals during PM tasks in the ion implantation process. Airborne arsenic samples and bulk samples were obtained during various ion implanter PM tasks in a semiconductor fabrication factory. The arithmetic mean (AM) and standard deviation (SD) of airborne arsenic in personal samples were 0.64 µg m -3 ± 0.92 µg m -3 (n = 9), and the highest level was 2.39 µg m -3 during medium-current ion implanter PM tasks. For area samples, the AM and SD were 0.42 µg m -3 ± 0.69 µg m -3 (n = 5) and the highest level was 1.79 µg m -3 during medium-current ion implanter PM tasks. Arsenic was also found in the bulk samples of debris produced during PM tasks. Other metals (Ag, Al, Cu, Pb, Cr, Sn, Mn, Ti, Fe, and W) were found, but at low levels, prompting few health concerns compared with those of arsenic. This study found that PM workers were exposed to airborne arsenic levels that differed significantly according to the type of ion implanter used.

show abstract

Comparison of Nanoparticle Exposure Levels Based on Facility Type—Small-Scale Laboratories, Large-Scale Manufacturing Workplaces, and Unintended Nanoparticle-Emitting Workplaces

Cited by 10 publications

References 19 publications

Comparison of Real Time Nanoparticle Monitoring Instruments in the Workplaces

Comparison of Real Time Nanoparticle Monitoring Instruments in the Workplaces

Size, composition, morphology, and health implications of airborne incidental metal-containing nanoparticles

Arsenic Exposure during Preventive Maintenance of an Ion Implanter in a Semiconductor Manufacturing Factory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About