title: Air sampling filtration media: Collection efficiency for respirable size-selective sampling.
abstract: The collection efficiencies of commonly used membrane air sampling filters in the ultrafine particle size range were investigated. Mixed cellulose ester (MCE; 0.45, 0.8, 1.2, and 5μm pore sizes), polycarbonate (0.4, 0.8, 2, and 5μm pore sizes), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE; 0.45, 1, 2, and 5μm pore sizes), polyvinyl chloride (PVC; 0.8 and 5μm pore sizes), and silver membrane (0.45, 0.8, 1.2, and 5μm pore sizes) filters were exposed to polydisperse sodium chloride (NaCl) particles in the size range of 10-400 nm. Test aerosols were nebulized and introduced into a calm air chamber through a diffusion dryer and aerosol neutralizer. The testing filters (37 mm diameter) were mounted in a conductive polypropylene filter-holder (cassette) within a metal testing tube. The experiments were conducted at flow rates between 1.7 and 11.2 l min-1. The particle size distributions of NaCl challenge aerosol were measured upstream and downstream of the test filters by a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS). Three different filters of each type with at least three repetitions for each pore size were tested. In general, the collection efficiency varied with airflow, pore size, and sampling duration. In addition, both collection efficiency and pressure drop increased with decreased pore size and increased sampling flow rate, but they differed among filter types and manufacturer. The present study confirmed that the MCE, PTFE, and PVC filters have a relatively high collection efficiency for challenge particles much smaller than their nominal pore size and are considerably more efficient than polycarbonate and silver membrane filters, especially at larger nominal pore sizes.
authors.affiliation: Health Effects Laboratory Division, Exposure Assessment Branch, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
authors.forename: Jhy-Charm
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Soo
authors.affiliation: Health Effects Laboratory Division, Exposure Assessment Branch, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
authors.forename: Keenan
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Monaghan
authors.affiliation: Health Effects Laboratory Division, Exposure Assessment Branch, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
authors.forename: Taekhee
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.affiliation: Health Effects Laboratory Division, Biostatistics and Epidemiology Branch, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
authors.forename: Mike
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Kashon
authors.affiliation: Health Effects Laboratory Division, Exposure Assessment Branch, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
authors.forename: Martin
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Harper
references.citation: Ann Occup Hyg. 1960 Jul;2:127-32
references.pmid: 14445915
references.citation: J Aerosol Sci. 2010 Jul;41(7):655-664
references.pmid: 37583893
references.citation: Ann Occup Hyg. 2007 Mar;51(2):143-51
references.pmid: 17041245
references.citation: Ann Occup Hyg. 2012 Jul;56(5):581-94
references.pmid: 22752097
references.citation: Ann Occup Hyg. 2012 May;56(4):413-25
references.pmid: 22186376
references.citation: AMA Arch Ind Hyg Occup Med. 1953 Jan;7(1):1-11
references.pmid: 13007196
references.citation: Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Aug;54(6):697-709
references.pmid: 20660144
references.citation: J Occup Environ Hyg. 2008 May;5(5):286-95
references.pmid: 18322869
references.citation: Ann Occup Hyg. 2006 Apr;50(3):259-69
references.pmid: 16344291