Validating a Model for the Prediction of Dust Generation

Lanning, Jeffrey S.; Boundy, Maryanne G.; Leith, David

doi:10.1080/02726359508906673

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Modeling of the aerosolization and dust generation of powders has also been attempted (Plinke et al ., 1994a,b; Lanning et al ., 1995; Ibaseta et al ., 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dustiness of Fine and Nanoscale Powders

2012

The Annals of Occupational Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dustiness may be defined as the propensity of a powder to form airborne dust by a prescribed mechanical stimulus; dustiness testing is typically intended to replicate mechanisms of dust generation encountered in workplaces. A novel dustiness testing device, developed for pharmaceutical application, was evaluated in the dustiness investigation of 27 fine and nanoscale powders. The device efficiently dispersed small (mg) quantities of a wide variety of fine and nanoscale powders, into a small sampling chamber. Measurements consisted of gravimetrically determined total and respirable dustiness. The following materials were studied: single and multiwalled carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, and carbon blacks; fumed oxides of titanium, aluminum, silicon, and cerium; metallic nanoparticles (nickel, cobalt, manganese, and silver) silicon carbide, Arizona road dust; nanoclays; and lithium titanate. Both the total and respirable dustiness spanned two orders of magnitude (0.3–37.9% and 0.1–31.8% of the predispersed test powders, respectively). For many powders, a significant respirable dustiness was observed. For most powders studied, the respirable dustiness accounted for approximately one-third of the total dustiness. It is believed that this relationship holds for many fine and nanoscale test powders (i.e. those primarily selected for this study), but may not hold for coarse powders. Neither total nor respirable dustiness was found to be correlated with BET surface area, therefore dustiness is not determined by primary particle size. For a subset of test powders, aerodynamic particle size distributions by number were measured (with an electrical low-pressure impactor and an aerodynamic particle sizer). Particle size modes ranged from approximately 300nm to several micrometers, but no modes below 100nm, were observed. It is therefore unlikely that these materials would exhibit a substantial sub-100nm particle contribution in a workplace.

show abstract

“…Modeling of the aerosolization and dust generation of powders has also been attempted (Plinke et al ., 1994a,b; Lanning et al ., 1995; Ibaseta et al ., 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dustiness of Fine and Nanoscale Powders

2012

The Annals of Occupational Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This research included some of the first investigations of the effects of particle size, humidity and moisture content on the dust-producing ability of a wide variety of materials. Their device can be seen as an early forerunner to an entire class of modern free-fall dust-generation chambers for industrial applications of dustiness testing and particle sizing [22][23][24][25], as well as devices with applications to geological dust research [26][27][28][29]. Other early dust generators (described in [30]) included devices based on shaking material through a sieve [31,32], as well as the "Wright Dust Feed" [33,34], which used a scraper blade to generate dust from a rotating cylindrical plug of source material.…”

Section: Early Dust Generatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technologies for laboratory generation of dust from geological materials

Gill

Zobeck

Stout

2006

Journal of Hazardous Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…That study also reports the first measurements of the fractionation of particles from the parent material under different conditions of relative humidity and moisture. Their device is considered the precursor of the whole series of modern devices for producing dust and for observing the free fall of particles of various sizes (Cheng 1973;Sutter et al 1982;Heitbrink et al 1992;Lanning 1995). Subsequent dust formation devices used the principle of vibration screening (Deichman et al 1944;Sonkin et al 1946), or produce dust by means of a scraper that breaks the material mounted on a rotating cylinder (Graham et al 1985).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of dust samples from a coal strip mine using a resuspension chamber

Civiš

Thimmaiah

Hovorka

2017

European Journal of Environmental Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A metallic cylindrical resuspension chamber (V = 0.437 m 3 , S = 0.35 m 2 , S/V = 8.38) was constructed to disperse samples of soil and various kinds of dust. The chamber allows on-line determination of number/mass size distribution of aerosol particles formed by dispersion and subsequent sampling of size-segregated particles on filter media. The samples tested were lignite, power plant flue ash and overburden soil from the Nastup coal strip mine in Northern Bohemia. About 20 mg of the individual samples were pneumatically dispersed by 0.5 liter of pressurized air inside the chamber under defined temperature and humidity conditions. Then the dynamics of aerosol size distributions was recorded using an aerodynamic particle sizer with a frequency of 5 seconds. The lignite and flue ash contributed most to the mass of atmospheric aerosol particles smaller than 10/2.5 micrometer -PM 10 / PM 2.5 . The re-suspended mass of the samples varied between 0.001% for overburden soil and 0.32% for mine road soil. The aerosolized lignite and flue ash samples, sampled by a Harvard Impactor and a Personal Cascade Impactor Sampler, revealed that the ash contained higher amounts of fine particles than the lignite and subsequent chemical analyses, carried out using SEM-EDX, reveals that the PM 2.5 fraction formed by dispersion of the ash samples had the highest content of sulphur, and PM 10 was dominated by Si. PM 10 was closest to mullite, while the PM 2.5 fraction contained sulphides, pyrites, pyrrhotites and polytypes of sulphide. The PM 1 fraction was dominated by quartz glass. The fractions of sizes 2.5-1 μm and 0.5-0.25 μm were dominated by Si and S, respectively.

show abstract

Validating a Model for the Prediction of Dust Generation

Cited by 10 publications

References 5 publications

Dustiness of Fine and Nanoscale Powders

Dustiness of Fine and Nanoscale Powders

Technologies for laboratory generation of dust from geological materials

Characterization of dust samples from a coal strip mine using a resuspension chamber

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About