Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Swedish Defence Research Agency, CBRN Defence and Security Division, Cementvägen 20, SE-901 82, Umeå, Sweden.
Ann Work Expo Health. 2017 Oct 1;61(8):1029-1034. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxx067.
Dust is generally sampled on a filter using air pumps, but passive sampling could be a cost-effective alternative. One promising passive sampler is the University of North Carolina passive aerosol sampler (UNC sampler). The aim of this study is to characterize and compare the UNC sampler's performance with PM10 and PM2.5 impactors in a working environment.
Area sampling was carried out at different mining locations using UNC samplers in parallel with PM2.5 and PM10 impactors. Two different collection surfaces, polycarbonate (PC) and carbon tabs (CT), were employed for the UNC sampling. Sampling was carried out for 4-25 hours.
The UNC samplers underestimated the concentrations compared to PM10 and PM2.5 impactor data. At the location with the highest aerosol concentration, the time-averaged mean of PC showed 24% and CT 35% of the impactor result for PM2.5. For PM10, it was 39% with PC and 58% with CT. Sample blank values differed between PC and CT. For PM2.5, PC blank values were ~7 times higher than those of CT, but only 1.8 times higher for PM10. The blank variations were larger for PC than for CT.
Particle mass concentrations appear to be underestimated by the UNC sampler compared to impactors, more so for PM2.5 than for PM10. CT may be preferred as a collection surface because the blank values were lower and less variable than for PC. Future validations in the working environment should include respirable dust sampling.
通常使用空气泵在过滤器上采集粉尘样本,但被动采样可能是一种具有成本效益的替代方法。一种很有前途的被动采样器是北卡罗来纳大学被动气溶胶采样器(UNC 采样器)。本研究的目的是在工作环境中对 UNC 采样器与 PM10 和 PM2.5 撞击器的性能进行特征描述和比较。
在不同的采矿地点进行区域采样,同时使用 UNC 采样器和 PM2.5 和 PM10 撞击器。UNC 采样使用两种不同的收集表面,聚碳酸酯(PC)和碳片(CT)。采样时间为 4-25 小时。
与 PM10 和 PM2.5 撞击器数据相比,UNC 采样器低估了浓度。在气溶胶浓度最高的地点,PC 的时间平均平均值显示 PM2.5 的撞击器结果为 24%,CT 为 35%。对于 PM10,PC 为 39%,CT 为 58%。PC 和 CT 之间的空白值有所不同。对于 PM2.5,PC 的空白值比 CT 高约 7 倍,但 PM10 仅高 1.8 倍。PC 的空白值变化大于 CT。
与撞击器相比,UNC 采样器采集的颗粒物质量浓度似乎被低估,PM2.5 比 PM10 更为明显。CT 可能更适合作为收集表面,因为空白值较低且变化较小。在工作环境中的未来验证应包括可吸入粉尘采样。