Simpson A T, Stear M, Groves J A, Piney M, Bradley S D, Stagg S, Crook B
Health and Safety Laboratory, Broad Lane, Sheffield S3 7HQ, UK.
Ann Occup Hyg. 2003 Jan;47(1):17-30. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/meg006.
This paper summarizes the analytical and occupational hygiene findings from a recent survey of occupational exposure to metalworking fluids (MWFs) in the engineering industry. The aim of the survey was to link MWF mist exposure measurements with particular engineering processes and controls, and utilize the data obtained to develop exposure standards. At the same time the opportunity was taken to assess fluid management and control, including bacterial and fines contamination in the machine sumps. In general, occupational exposure to mineral oil MWF mist was controlled to <3 mg/m(3) (8 h time-weighted average) and to <1 mg/m(3) for water-mix MWF mist (in terms of the concentrate). These exposure values do not necessarily represent best practice, but are believed to be achievable and representative of industry as a whole. Gravimetric analysis of the total inhalable particulate was found to be a good predictor of mineral oil MWF mist but not for water-mix MWF mist. Grinding and drilling operations produced higher exposures than turning and milling for water-mix fluids. There were insufficient data to compare machining operations for mineral oil MWFs. On the whole, fluid management was found to be poor, with most sites failing to meet industry good practice or Health & Safety Executive (HSE) standards. Some of the operating procedures utilized were deficient or unsatisfactory. Poor standards of fluid management were found at all sizes of company. High levels of bacteria, endotoxin and fines were found in sumps, and control of other factors, such as water-mix fluid concentration, was often poor. Mineral oils had higher levels of fines than water-mix fluids (medians of 395 and 18 mg/l, respectively), and grinding produced high levels of fines in both types of MWF. Many water-mix sumps contained bacterial levels of >1 x 10(6) CFU/ml, and endotoxin levels of >100 000 EU/ml were not uncommon. The median values were 109 000 CFU/ml and 8039 EU/ml, respectively. Mists could potentially contain extensive contamination from bacteria and endotoxin. Analysis of the data suggests that sumps operating under typical conditions for machining (a temperature of 20 degrees C, a pH of 9 and a fluid strength below 10%), also appear to provide optimum conditions for the proliferation of bacteria. Low levels of benzo[a]pyrene (median 0.03 micro g/g) were found in the mineral oils, and low levels of N-nitrosodiethanolamine (median 0.4 micro g/ml) were found in the water-mix MWFs. The results of this work will contribute to guidance from the HSE, setting out accepted industry good practice, including guide values for MWF mist and sump fluid contaminants, with significant emphasis on sump fluid management (maintenance and monitoring), as well as control issues.
本文总结了近期对工程行业金属加工液(MWFs)职业暴露情况调查的分析结果和职业卫生调查结果。该调查的目的是将MWFs雾暴露测量结果与特定的工程工艺及控制措施联系起来,并利用所获得的数据制定暴露标准。同时,还借此机会评估了液体管理与控制情况,包括机床油槽中的细菌和杂质污染。总体而言,矿物油MWFs雾的职业暴露被控制在<3毫克/立方米(8小时时间加权平均值),水基混合MWFs雾(以浓缩液计)的职业暴露被控制在<1毫克/立方米。这些暴露值不一定代表最佳实践,但据信是可以实现的,并且代表了整个行业的情况。发现对总可吸入颗粒物的重量分析是矿物油MWFs雾的良好预测指标,但对水基混合MWFs雾则不然。对于水基混合液,磨削和钻孔操作产生的暴露水平高于车削和铣削操作。对于矿物油MWFs,没有足够的数据来比较加工操作。总体而言,发现液体管理较差,大多数场所未达到行业良好实践标准或健康与安全执行局(HSE)的标准。所采用的一些操作程序存在缺陷或不尽人意。在各种规模的公司中都发现了液体管理标准较差的情况。在油槽中发现了高浓度的细菌、内毒素和杂质,并且对其他因素(如水基混合液浓度)的控制往往较差。矿物油中的杂质水平高于水基混合液(中位数分别为395毫克/升和18毫克/升),并且在两种类型的MWFs中,磨削都会产生高浓度的杂质。许多水基混合油槽中的细菌水平>1×10⁶CFU/毫升,内毒素水平>100000 EU/毫升的情况并不罕见。中位数分别为109000 CFU/毫升和8039 EU/毫升。雾可能潜在地含有来自细菌和内毒素的大量污染物。数据分析表明,在典型加工条件(温度20摄氏度、pH值9、液体浓度低于10%)下运行的油槽,似乎也为细菌的繁殖提供了最佳条件。在矿物油中发现了低水平的苯并[a]芘(中位数0.03微克/克),在水基混合MWFs中发现了低水平的N - 亚硝基二乙醇胺(中位数0.4微克/毫升)。这项工作的结果将有助于HSE制定指南,列出公认的行业良好实践,包括MWFs雾和油槽液体污染物的指导值,重点强调油槽液体管理(维护和监测)以及控制问题。
Ann Occup Hyg. 2003-1
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2006-9
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2010-5
Ann Occup Hyg. 2008-10
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2007-3
Appl Occup Environ Hyg. 2003-11
Ann Occup Hyg. 2008-10
Appl Occup Environ Hyg. 2003-11
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022-6-6
Am J Epidemiol. 2022-5-20
Occup Environ Med. 2022-1
Ann Work Expo Health. 2021-6-12
Iran J Public Health. 2019-4
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019-5-4