Galea Karen S, Searl Alison, Sánchez-Jiménez Araceli, Woldbæk Torill, Halgard Kristin, Thorud Syvert, Steinsvåg Kjersti, Krüger Kirsti, Maccalman Laura, Cherrie John W, van Tongeren Martie
Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM), Research Avenue North, Riccarton, Edinburgh, UK.
Ann Occup Hyg. 2012 Jan;56(1):61-9. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mer078. Epub 2011 Sep 15.
There are no recognized analytical methods for measuring oil mist and vapours arising from drilling fluids used in offshore petroleum drilling industry. To inform the future development of improved methods of analysis for oil mist and vapours this study assessed the inter- and intra-laboratory variability in oil mist and vapour analysis. In addition, sample losses during transportation and storage were assessed.
Replicate samples for oil mist and vapour were collected using the 37-mm Millipore closed cassette and charcoal tube assembly. Sampling was conducted in a simulated shale shaker room, similar to that found offshore for processing drilling fluids. Samples were analysed at two different laboratories, one in Norway and one in the UK. Oil mist samples were analysed using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), while oil vapour samples were analysed by gas chromatography (GC).
The comparison of replicate samples showed substantial within- and between-laboratory variability in reported oil mist concentrations. The variability in oil vapour results was considerably reduced compared to oil mist, provided that a common method of calibration and quantification was adopted. The study also showed that losses can occur during transportation and storage of samples.
There is a need to develop a harmonized method for the quantification of oil mist on filter and oil vapour on charcoal supported by a suitable proficiency testing scheme for laboratories involved in the analysis of occupational hygiene samples for the petroleum industry. The uncertainties in oil mist and vapour measurement have substantial implications in relation to compliance with occupational exposure limits and also in the reliability of any exposure-response information reported in epidemiological studies.
对于海上石油钻探行业使用的钻井液产生的油雾和蒸汽,目前尚无公认的分析测量方法。为了指导未来改进油雾和蒸汽分析方法的开发,本研究评估了油雾和蒸汽分析中实验室间和实验室内的变异性。此外,还评估了运输和储存过程中的样品损失。
使用37毫米密理博封闭盒和活性炭管组件采集油雾和蒸汽的重复样品。采样在模拟的页岩振动筛室中进行,类似于海上处理钻井液的环境。样品在两个不同的实验室进行分析,一个在挪威,一个在英国。油雾样品采用傅里叶变换红外光谱法(FTIR)分析,油蒸汽样品采用气相色谱法(GC)分析。
重复样品的比较显示,报告的油雾浓度在实验室内和实验室间存在很大差异。如果采用通用的校准和定量方法,油蒸汽结果的变异性与油雾相比会大幅降低。研究还表明,样品在运输和储存过程中可能会出现损失。
需要制定一种统一的方法,用于定量滤纸截留的油雾和活性炭吸附的油蒸汽,并为参与石油行业职业卫生样品分析的实验室提供合适的能力验证计划。油雾和蒸汽测量中的不确定性对符合职业接触限值以及流行病学研究中报告的任何接触-反应信息的可靠性都有重大影响。