Field Comparison of 37-mm Closed-Face Cassettes and IOM Samplers

Demange, Martine; Görner, Peter; Elcabache, Jean-Marie; Wrobel, R.

doi:10.1080/104732202753438289

Cited by 51 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In field studies conducted in France by the INRS (Demange et al 2002) wall deposits added to the filter catch in CFC samplers resulted in mass concentrations of lead not considerably different from those found from collocated IOM samplers where both filters and walls were also accounted for. Similarly, the filter deposits of collocated IOM and CFC samplers in studies in the USA by also contained similar quantities of lead.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Comparison of Filter and Wall Deposits From Samplers Used to Collect Airborne Lead-Containing Dusts at Field Sites

Chisholm

Lee

Slaven

et al. 2012

Aerosol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and 37 mm closed face cassette samplers (CFC) were deployed where occupational exposures to lead-containing dusts were known to occur. Discrete particle analyses of wall and filter deposits were performed by Scanning Electron Microscopy-Energy Dispersive Xray Spectrometry (SEM-EDX). From the elemental composition and projected area diameter of each particle a density, volume, and mass were calculated, and a mass-weighted size distribution for each filter and corresponding wall deposit determined. Comparison of pairs of wall and filter mass-weighted size distributions by Mann-Whitney statistical analysis shows that in only 3 of 72 examples from either sampler were the distributions significantly different that suggests that the mechanisms of particle deposition on the sampler walls for particles in this size range (0.5 µm through 20 µm) do not differ for the different samplers. Furthermore, in only 4 of 33 sampler pairs did the IOM and CFC results differ. Although these results originate from several distinct processes characterized by different chemical and physical dust generation mechanisms, they suggest that in these environments the measurement of "total dust" by the CFC and inhalable dust by the IOM will be very similar when both samplers are processed the same way with respect to the including or excluding wall deposits with the filter catch. However, these results may not be applicable to environments where larger particles exist.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Comparison of Filter and Wall Deposits From Samplers Used to Collect Airborne Lead-Containing Dusts at Field Sites

Chisholm

Lee

Slaven

et al. 2012

Aerosol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, while in laboratory and field comparisons of the IOM and CFC the internal wall deposits in the IOM have always been included, equivalent wall deposits in the CFC rarely have been included. Where they have been included they have been shown to be of a similar magnitude to those found in the IOM, and sometimes even exceeding the deposit on the filter (Demange et al 1990(Demange et al , 2002Harper and Demange 2007). One argument that could be made for not including the CFC wall deposits is the possibility that the size of the wall deposit particles may be larger than those on the filter, and perhaps above the limit of inhalability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Size Distributions of 0.5 to 20 μm Aerodynamic Diameter Lead-Containing Particles from Aerosol Sampler Walls and Filters

Lee

Chisholm

Slaven

et al. 2009

Aerosol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study presented here investigates the number weighted particle size distributions of aerosols generated in the laboratory from lead oxide and lead sulfide dusts and sampled by Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM) and closed face cassette (CFC) samplers as determined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The wall deposits and filter deposits from each sampler were characterized separately. A Mann-Whitney statistical analysis revealed that differences in the number weighted distributions of particles captured by the filter and the wall were not significant over the size range (up to 20 µm aerodynamic equivalent diameter) present in these laboratory-generated aerosols. Furthermore, for these samples it was not possible to distinguish an absolute difference between the IOM and CFC filter catches. By comparing direct measurements of aerodynamic equivalent diameter (AED) made by an Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS) to AEDs calculated from SEM images, empirical shape factors for lead oxide and lead sulfide were determined. To validate this approach APS and SEM measurements of the AED of 2 µm and 6 µm physical diameter monodisperse glass and polystyrene microspheres were made. Using the shape factors of spheres and the known densities of these materials, it was found that the SEM determinations of AED agreed with the APS results. To demonstrate the reliability of the redeposition method of sample preparation, lead sulfide and lead oxide aerosols were briefly sampled by IOM samplers such that sufficient particles were collected for SEM examination directly on the filter but not so many that particles were likely to touch or overlap. Half of each filter was analyzed in the SEM directly; the other half was ultrasonically removed and re-deposited for analysis by SEM. There were no statistically significant differences in their number weighted size distributions, demonstrating that the sample treatment process does not change the size distribution of these particular aerosols.

show abstract

“…According to Demange et al, the particles deposited on the walls should be the largest and the percentages of mass deposited on the walls seem to be very variable when large-size particles are involved. 23 …”

Section: Working Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field comparison of two inhalable samplers used in Italy to measure the wood dust exposure

Campopiano¹,

Basili²,

Angelosanto³

et al. 2016

International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Particle size affects the performance of personal air samplers used to measure dust exposure in the workplace. Few field studies have been conducted for comparing the performance of personal inhalable samplers. Objective: To compare wood dust sampling with two inhalable samplers: IOM (Institute of Occupational Medicine) and Italian cone. Methods: 136 Italian cone/IOM paired samples and 136 passive IOM samples were collected in 30 Italian woodworking industries. The valid number of sample pairs was 114. Ultra-large particles were collected by passive IOM. The sampling membranes were weighed and the size particles were measured. Mass differences in active and passive IOM samples were calculated (IOM-Δ). Results: Statistical analysis of all 114 Italian cone/active IOM paired results showed a significant mass difference (P < 0.05) and no significant mass difference for sanding and cutting woodworking processes. The Italian cone/IOM-Δ paired results consistently showed no statistically significant mass differences in any woodworking processes. Both samplers performed similarly when ultra-large particles mass contribution was not considered. Conclusions: These findings confirm the presence of ultra-large particles in woodworking. The Italian cone and IOM samplers can be used interchangeably for personal wood dust exposure assessment, when the wood activities produce small-size particles.

show abstract

Field Comparison of 37-mm Closed-Face Cassettes and IOM Samplers

Cited by 51 publications

References 14 publications

Comparison of Filter and Wall Deposits From Samplers Used to Collect Airborne Lead-Containing Dusts at Field Sites

Comparison of Filter and Wall Deposits From Samplers Used to Collect Airborne Lead-Containing Dusts at Field Sites

Size Distributions of 0.5 to 20 μm Aerodynamic Diameter Lead-Containing Particles from Aerosol Sampler Walls and Filters

Field comparison of two inhalable samplers used in Italy to measure the wood dust exposure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About