Performance of selected inhalable aerosol samplers

Background: The collection of a sample that is representative of inhalation exposure relies on the selection of a sampler that is appropriate for the specific workplace conditions. The objective of this paper was to compare the performance of six inhalable aerosol samplers, using information from va...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Occupational Health Southern Africa Ročník 25; číslo 1; s. 17 - 23
Hlavní autoři: Van der Merwe, C.J., Eloff, F.C., Du Plessis, J.L., Franken, A., Ramotsehoa, M.C., Laubscher, P.J., Linde, S.J.L.
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: Mettamedia (Pty) Ltd 01.02.2019
Témata:
Aspiration efficiency
Inlet orientation angle
Sampling
Sampling efficiency
Wind speeds
ISSN:1024-6274, 2226-6097
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Background: The collection of a sample that is representative of inhalation exposure relies on the selection of a sampler that is appropriate for the specific workplace conditions. The objective of this paper was to compare the performance of six inhalable aerosol samplers, using information from various field and laboratory (wind tunnel) evaluation studies, and manufacturers’ descriptions. Methods: Twenty-three aerosol sampler evaluation studies were reviewed. The sampler design characteristics and factors that might influence the performance of different inhalable aerosol samplers were compared. The Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM) sampler, seven-hole (SH) sampler, Gesamtstaubprobenahme an der Person (GSP) sampler, Button sampler, personal air sampler (PAS-6), and closed-face cassette (CFC) sampler were assessed. Performance was defined as the efficiency with which a sampler collected particles as described in the sampling conventions.Findings: The IOM sampler is ideal for sampling large particles since it is not affected by impaction. The GSP, SH, PAS-6, and CFC samplers under-sample large particles at higher wind speeds. The Button sampler’s performance, described by the manufacturer as being independent of orientation to wind and wind speeds, showed higher sampling efficiency at higher wind speeds.Conclusion: With the exception of the IOM sampler, all samplers are negatively affected by gravitational settling, whilst the efficiencies of the CFC and PAS-6 samplers are reduced in the presence of larger particles and higher wind speeds. Environmental conditions and types (and sizes) of particles likely to be present must be considered when selecting a suitable sampler.
ISSN:1024-6274
2226-6097
DOI:10.10520/EJC-13e713f4ee