Moody R P, Ritter L
Environmental Health Centre, Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.
Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1990 Feb;51(2):79-83. doi: 10.1080/15298669091369367.
The results of two methods of analysis for measuring glove permeability to pesticides are reported. The standard ASTM F739-85 testing procedure was used to determine breakthrough times and permeation rates for four protective glove materials for two commercially available pesticide formulations. The same glove materials and pesticides then were tested using an in-house developed automated in-vitro diffusion analysis (AIDA) procedure. The ASTM and AIDA procedures both demonstrated no detectable breakthrough of Sevin 50W or 2,4-D Amine 96% for nitrile butyl rubber and polyvinyl chloride gloves. Although no breakthrough of Sevin 50W or 2,4-D Amine 96 was detected for natural rubber or neoprene gloves following the ASTM procedure, permeation was observed in 2 of 3 replicate tests for both rubber and neoprene gloves when using the AIDA method. The observed discrepancy may have been caused by a longer sampling duration for the AIDA method (16 hr) than the ASTM procedure (8 hr). Advantages of the AIDA procedure are discussed.
报告了两种测量手套对农药渗透性的分析方法的结果。采用标准ASTM F739 - 85测试程序，测定了两种市售农药制剂在四种防护手套材料上的穿透时间和渗透速率。然后使用内部开发的自动体外扩散分析（AIDA）程序对相同的手套材料和农药进行测试。ASTM和AIDA程序均表明，腈基丁腈橡胶和聚氯乙烯手套对西维因50W或96%的2,4 - D胺均未检测到可检测的穿透。尽管按照ASTM程序，天然橡胶或氯丁橡胶手套未检测到西维因50W或96%的2,4 - D胺的穿透，但在使用AIDA方法时，橡胶和氯丁橡胶手套的3次重复测试中有2次观察到了渗透。观察到的差异可能是由于AIDA方法的采样持续时间（16小时）比ASTM程序（8小时）长。讨论了AIDA程序的优点。
