Suppr超能文献

将已有的粉末粉尘度测量系统与专门为药物物质开发的UNC粉尘度测试仪进行比较。

Comparison of established systems for measuring the dustiness of powders with the UNC Dustiness Tester developed especially for pharmaceutical substances.

作者信息

Bach Sylvia, Eickmann Udo, Schmidt Eberhard

机构信息

Department of Safety Engineering/Environmental Protection, University of Wuppertal, Rainer-Gruenter-Strasse, Building FF, 42119 Wuppertal, Germany;

出版信息

Ann Occup Hyg. 2013 Oct;57(8):1078-86. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/met022. Epub 2013 Jun 8.

Abstract

Four methods for evaluating the dustiness of powders have been compared. The relatively new UNC Dustiness Tester first described by Boundy et al. (2006) in the Annals of Occupational Hygiene, which was developed specifically for the measurement of hazardous and/or highly potent substances, a single-drop device, a rotating-drum method, and a continuous drop-down apparatus. The four methods show four different ratings of dustiness for nine reference materials. This article describes the differences, explores reasons for the deviations, identifies a need for distinct dustiness test methods, and highlights the significance for occupational health and safety.

摘要

已对四种评估粉末扬尘性的方法进行了比较。相对较新的UNC扬尘测试仪最早由邦迪等人于2006年在《职业卫生学年鉴》中描述,该测试仪是专门为测量危险和/或高效能物质而开发的,此外还有单滴装置、转鼓法和连续下拉装置。这四种方法对九种参考材料显示出四种不同的扬尘等级。本文描述了这些差异,探讨了偏差原因,确定了对不同扬尘测试方法的需求,并强调了其对职业健康与安全的重要性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验