Balanay Jo Anne G, Lungu Claudiu T
a Environmental Health Sciences Program, Department of Health Education and Promotion, East Carolina University , Greenville , North Carolina.
b Department of Environmental Health Sciences , University of Alabama at Birmingham , Birmingham , Alabama.
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2016;13(2):141-7. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2015.1091960.
Activated carbon fiber (ACF) is considered as an alternative adsorbent to granular activated carbon (GAC) for the development of thinner, lighter, and efficient respirators because of their larger surface area and adsorption capacities, thinner critical bed depth, lighter weight, and fabric form. This study aims to measure the pressure drop across different types of commercially available ACFs in respirator cartridges to determine the ACF composition and density that will result in acceptably breathable respirators. Seven ACF types in cloth (ACFC) and felt (ACFF) forms were tested. ACFs in cartridges were challenged with pre-conditioned constant air flow (43 LPM, 23°C, 50% RH) at different compositions (single- or combination-ACF type) in a test chamber. Pressure drop across ACF cartridges were obtained using a micromanometer, and compared among different cartridge configurations, to those of the GAC cartridge, and to the NIOSH breathing resistance requirements for respirator cartridges. Single-ACF type cartridges filled with any ACFF had pressure drop measurements (23.71-39.93 mmH2O) within the NIOSH inhalation resistance requirement of 40 mmH2O, while those of the ACFC cartridges (85.47±3.67 mmH2O) exceeded twice the limit due possibly to the denser weaving of ACFC fibers. All single ACFF-type cartridges had higher pressure drop compared to the GAC cartridge (23.13±1.14 mmH2O). Certain ACF combinations (2 ACFF or ACFC/ACFF types) resulted to pressure drop (26.39-32.81 mmH2O) below the NIOSH limit. All single-ACFF type and all combination-ACF type cartridges with acceptable pressure drop had much lower adsorbent weights than GAC (≤15.2% of GAC weight), showing potential for light-weight respirator cartridges. 100% ACFC in cartridges may result to respirators with high breathing resistance and, thus, is not recommended. The more dense ACFF and ACFC types may still be possibly used in respirators by combining them with less dense ACFF materials and/or by reducing cartridge bed depth to reduce pressure drop to acceptable levels. ACFF by itself may be more appropriate as adsorbent materials in ACF respirator cartridges in terms of acceptable breathing resistance.
由于具有更大的表面积和吸附容量、更薄的临界床层深度、更轻的重量以及织物形态，活性炭纤维（ACF）被认为是颗粒活性炭（GAC）的替代吸附剂，可用于开发更薄、更轻且高效的呼吸器。本研究旨在测量呼吸器滤芯中不同类型市售ACF的压降，以确定能产生可接受呼吸性能的ACF组成和密度。测试了七种布状（ACFC）和毡状（ACFF）的ACF类型。在测试腔中，以不同组成（单一或组合ACF类型）对滤芯中的ACF施加预处理后的恒定气流（43 LPM，23°C，50%相对湿度）。使用微压计获得ACF滤芯的压降，并在不同滤芯配置之间、与GAC滤芯以及与NIOSH对呼吸器滤芯的呼吸阻力要求进行比较。填充任何ACFF的单一ACF类型滤芯的压降测量值（23.71 - 39.93 mmHg₂O）在NIOSH吸入阻力要求的40 mmHg₂O范围内，而ACFC滤芯的压降（85.47±3.67 mmHg₂O）超过限值两倍，这可能是由于ACFC纤维编织更紧密所致。所有单一ACFF型滤芯的压降均高于GAC滤芯（23.13±1.14 mmHg₂O）。某些ACF组合（2种ACFF或ACFC/ACFF类型）的压降（26.39 - 32.81 mmHg₂O）低于NIOSH限值。所有压降可接受的单一ACFF型和所有组合ACF型滤芯的吸附剂重量均远低于GAC（≤GAC重量的15.2%），显示出用于轻型呼吸器滤芯的潜力。滤芯中100%的ACFC可能导致呼吸器具有高呼吸阻力，因此不建议使用。密度更高的ACFF和ACFC类型仍有可能通过与密度较低的ACFF材料组合和/或通过减小滤芯床层深度以将压降降低到可接受水平而用于呼吸器。就可接受的呼吸阻力而言，ACFF本身可能更适合作为ACF呼吸器滤芯中的吸附材料。
