Thorpe Andrew
Health and Safety Laboratory, Harpur Hill Buxton, Derbyshire, UK.
Ann Occup Hyg. 2007 Jan;51(1):97-112. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mel032. Epub 2006 Jun 23.
The performances of five portable direct-reading dust monitors were investigated in a wind tunnel for a range of industrial dusts and three sizes of aluminium oxide test dust to mainly determine their suitability for measuring the inhalable fraction of airborne dust in workplaces. The instruments tested were Split 2 (SKC Ltd), Sidepak (TSI Inc.), Dataram (Thermo Electron Ltd), PDS-2 (Sibata Scientific Technology Ltd) and the Respicon TM (Hund Ltd). The instruments' responses were compared with reference dust samplers. These were the IOM sampler for the inhalable fraction and the Casella cyclone sampler for the respirable fraction. All instruments are predominantly responsive to and are designed to measure particles in the respirable size range, although two of the instruments, the Split 2 and Respicon TM, are claimed to be capable of measuring inhalable-sized particles. For the purpose of the tests, major modifications to an existing wind tunnel dust injection system were made to facilitate the generation of uniform concentrations of large inhalable-sized dust particles at low air velocities. Each monitor greatly underestimated the measurement of inhalable concentration for all the dusts tested, although the linearity was good over a wide range of concentrations for any particular size distribution of dust. However, their calibration factors, defined as the ratio of reference inhalable concentration to monitor concentration, were especially sensitive to changes in particle size as the response of the instruments decreased rapidly with increasing particle size. The monitors generally overestimated the measurement of respirable dust concentration by up to a factor of about 2, apart from the PDS-2, which underestimated it by a factor of up to 3. There was, however, a great deal more scatter in the reference respirable concentration measurements owing to the collection of small dust samples. Therefore, monitor linearity and effects of monitor response to changes in particle size could not be accurately investigated for the respirable fraction. The sampling head of the Split 2 monitor incorporates an IOM inlet and filter to gravimetrically collect the inhalable fraction of airborne dust. This can give a concurrent reference measure of inhalable airborne dust concentration. However, poor sealing within the sampling head resulted in some of the sampled dust not reaching the backup filter. This resulted in the Split 2 underestimating the reference inhalable dust concentration, which meant that it could not be accurately used as a calibration standard. Communications with the manufacturers have since revealed that the sampling head has recently been redesigned in order to improve the seal and eliminate leakage. The Respicon sampler gravimetrically underestimated the inhalable dust concentration, and did so increasingly as the particle size increased.
在风洞中对五台便携式直读式粉尘监测仪进行了性能研究,研究对象包括一系列工业粉尘和三种粒径的氧化铝测试粉尘,主要目的是确定它们在测量工作场所空气中可吸入粉尘分数方面的适用性。所测试的仪器分别是Split 2(SKC有限公司)、Sidepak(TSI公司)、Dataram(热电电子有限公司)、PDS - 2(柴田科学技术有限公司)和Respicon TM(洪德有限公司)。将这些仪器的响应与参考粉尘采样器进行了比较。参考采样器分别是用于可吸入分数的IOM采样器和用于可呼吸分数的卡塞拉旋风采样器。所有仪器主要对可呼吸粒径范围内的颗粒有响应,并且设计用于测量此类颗粒,不过其中两台仪器,即Split 2和Respicon TM,声称能够测量可吸入粒径的颗粒。为了进行测试,对现有的风洞粉尘注入系统进行了重大改进,以便在低风速下生成均匀浓度的大粒径可吸入粉尘颗粒。尽管对于任何特定粒径分布的粉尘,在很宽的浓度范围内线性良好,但每台监测仪都大大低估了所有测试粉尘的可吸入浓度测量值。然而,它们的校准因子(定义为参考可吸入浓度与监测仪浓度之比)对粒径变化特别敏感,因为仪器的响应随着粒径增大而迅速下降。除了PDS - 2低估了可呼吸粉尘浓度测量值达3倍之外,这些监测仪通常高估可呼吸粉尘浓度测量值达约2倍。然而,由于采集的粉尘样本量小,参考可呼吸浓度测量值的离散度要大得多。因此,对于可呼吸分数,无法准确研究监测仪的线性以及监测仪响应随粒径变化的影响。Split 2监测仪的采样头包含一个IOM入口和过滤器,用于重量法采集空气中可吸入粉尘的分数。这可以同时给出空气中可吸入粉尘浓度的参考测量值。然而,采样头内部密封不良导致部分采样粉尘未到达备用过滤器。这导致Split 2低估了参考可吸入粉尘浓度,这意味着它不能准确用作校准标准。此后与制造商的沟通表明,采样头最近已重新设计以改善密封并消除泄漏。Respicon采样器重量法低估了可吸入粉尘浓度,并且随着粒径增大低估程度越来越大。