Martin Stephen, Moyer Ernest, Jensen Paul
NIOSH, Division of Respiratory Disease Studies, Morgantown, West Virginia 26505, USA.
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2006 Nov;3(11):631-41. doi: 10.1080/15459620600954365.
Although workplace protection factor (WPF) and simulated workplace protection factor (SWPF) studies provide useful information regarding the performance capabilities of powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) under certain workplace or simulated workplace conditions, some fail to address the issue of total PAPR unit performance over extended time. PAPR unit performance over time is of paramount importance in protecting worker health over the course of a work shift or at least for the recommended service lifetime of the PAPR battery pack, whichever is shorter. The need for PAPR unit performance testing has become even more important with the inception of 42 CFR 84 and the recent introduction of electrostatic respirator filter media into the PAPR market. This study was conducted to learn how current PAPRs certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health would perform under an 8-hour unit performance test similar to the dioctyl phthalate (DOP) loading test described in 42 CFR 84 for R- and P-series filters for nonpowered, air-purifying particulate respirators. In this study, entire PAPR units, four with mechanical filters and one with an electrostatic filter, were tested using a TSI Model 8122 Automated Respirator Tester, with and without the built-in breathing machine. The two, tight-fitting PAPRs, both with mechanical filters, showed little effect on performance resulting from the breathing machine. The two loose-fitting helmet PAPRs indicate that unit performance testing without the breathing machine is a more stringent test than testing with the breathing machine under the conditions used. The PAPR with a loose-fitting hood gave inconclusive results as to which testing condition is more stringent. The PAPR unit equipped with electrostatic filters gave the highest maximum penetration values during unit performance testing.
尽管工作场所防护因数(WPF)和模拟工作场所防护因数(SWPF)研究提供了有关电动空气净化呼吸器(PAPR)在特定工作场所或模拟工作场所条件下性能的有用信息,但一些研究未能解决PAPR整体装置在较长时间内的性能问题。PAPR整体装置随时间的性能对于在一个工作班次期间保护工人健康至关重要,或者至少对于PAPR电池组的推荐使用寿命而言,以较短者为准。随着42 CFR 84的颁布以及最近静电呼吸器过滤介质进入PAPR市场,对PAPR整体装置性能测试的需求变得更加重要。本研究旨在了解美国国家职业安全与健康研究所认证的当前PAPR在类似于42 CFR 84中所述的用于非动力空气净化颗粒呼吸器的R系列和P系列过滤器的邻苯二甲酸二辛酯(DOP)加载测试的8小时整体装置性能测试下的表现。在本研究中,使用TSI 8122型自动呼吸器测试仪对整个PAPR装置进行测试,其中四个配备机械过滤器,一个配备静电过滤器,测试时有无内置呼吸机。两个紧密贴合的PAPR,均配备机械过滤器,显示呼吸机对性能影响不大。两个宽松贴合的头盔式PAPR表明,在所用条件下,不使用呼吸机的整体装置性能测试比使用呼吸机的测试更为严格。配备宽松贴合头罩的PAPR对于哪种测试条件更严格给出了不确定的结果。配备静电过滤器的PAPR装置在整体装置性能测试期间给出了最高的最大穿透值。