Cargando…

Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study

Using an exposure chamber, we investigate the precision of the DustTrak DRX monitor by comparing its results to those obtained from taking traditional gravimetric samples of two stone minerals commonly used in asphalt and lactose powder. We also discuss the possibility of using real-time monitors su...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moazami, Therese Nitter, Svendsen, Kristin v Hirsch, Buhagen, Morten, Jørgensen, Rikke Bramming
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10238574/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37274722
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16127
_version_ 1785053321906618368
author Moazami, Therese Nitter
Svendsen, Kristin v Hirsch
Buhagen, Morten
Jørgensen, Rikke Bramming
author_facet Moazami, Therese Nitter
Svendsen, Kristin v Hirsch
Buhagen, Morten
Jørgensen, Rikke Bramming
author_sort Moazami, Therese Nitter
collection PubMed
description Using an exposure chamber, we investigate the precision of the DustTrak DRX monitor by comparing its results to those obtained from taking traditional gravimetric samples of two stone minerals commonly used in asphalt and lactose powder. We also discuss the possibility of using real-time monitors such as DustTrak DRX for occupational exposure monitoring purposes. The results are based on 19 days of experiment, each day with measurements collected over 4 h. Compared to the gravimetric samples, the DustTrak DRX overestimated the PM(2.5) and respirable dust concentrations, while it underestimated the total dust concentration by a factor of nearly two. However, the ratios, being done for more than one material, between the DustTrak DRX and the gravimetric sample readings varied daily and across the different exposure materials. Real-time sensors have the potential to excel at identifying exposure sources, evaluating the measured control efficiency, visualizing variations in exposure to motivate workers, and contributing to the identification of measures to be implemented to reduce exposure. For total dust, a correction factor of at least two should be used to bring its readings up to those for the corresponding gravimetric samples. Also, if the DustTrak DRX is used in the initial profiling of occupational exposure, the exposure could be considered acceptable if the readings are well below the occupational exposure limit (OELs) after correction. If the DustTrak DRX readings, after correction, is close to, or above, the accepted exposure concentrations, more thorough approaches would be required to validate the exposure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10238574
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102385742023-06-04 Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study Moazami, Therese Nitter Svendsen, Kristin v Hirsch Buhagen, Morten Jørgensen, Rikke Bramming Heliyon Research Article Using an exposure chamber, we investigate the precision of the DustTrak DRX monitor by comparing its results to those obtained from taking traditional gravimetric samples of two stone minerals commonly used in asphalt and lactose powder. We also discuss the possibility of using real-time monitors such as DustTrak DRX for occupational exposure monitoring purposes. The results are based on 19 days of experiment, each day with measurements collected over 4 h. Compared to the gravimetric samples, the DustTrak DRX overestimated the PM(2.5) and respirable dust concentrations, while it underestimated the total dust concentration by a factor of nearly two. However, the ratios, being done for more than one material, between the DustTrak DRX and the gravimetric sample readings varied daily and across the different exposure materials. Real-time sensors have the potential to excel at identifying exposure sources, evaluating the measured control efficiency, visualizing variations in exposure to motivate workers, and contributing to the identification of measures to be implemented to reduce exposure. For total dust, a correction factor of at least two should be used to bring its readings up to those for the corresponding gravimetric samples. Also, if the DustTrak DRX is used in the initial profiling of occupational exposure, the exposure could be considered acceptable if the readings are well below the occupational exposure limit (OELs) after correction. If the DustTrak DRX readings, after correction, is close to, or above, the accepted exposure concentrations, more thorough approaches would be required to validate the exposure. Elsevier 2023-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10238574/ /pubmed/37274722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16127 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Article
Moazami, Therese Nitter
Svendsen, Kristin v Hirsch
Buhagen, Morten
Jørgensen, Rikke Bramming
Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
title Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
title_full Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
title_fullStr Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
title_full_unstemmed Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
title_short Comparing PM(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
title_sort comparing pm(2.5), respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10238574/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37274722
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16127
work_keys_str_mv AT moazamitheresenitter comparingpm25respirabledustandtotaldustfractionsusingrealtimeandgravimetricsamplesinanexposurechamberstudy
AT svendsenkristinvhirsch comparingpm25respirabledustandtotaldustfractionsusingrealtimeandgravimetricsamplesinanexposurechamberstudy
AT buhagenmorten comparingpm25respirabledustandtotaldustfractionsusingrealtimeandgravimetricsamplesinanexposurechamberstudy
AT jørgensenrikkebramming comparingpm25respirabledustandtotaldustfractionsusingrealtimeandgravimetricsamplesinanexposurechamberstudy