title: Performance of High Flow Rate Personal Respirable Samplers When Challenged with Mineral Aerosols of Different Particle Size Distributions.
abstract: It is thought that the performance of respirable samplers may vary when exposed to dust aerosols with different particle sizes and wind speeds. This study investigated the performance of the GK 4.16 (RASCAL), GK 2.69, PPI 8, and FSP 10, high flow rate personal samplers when exposed to aerosols of mineral dust in a wind tunnel at two different wind speeds (1 and 2 m s(-1)) and orientations (towards and side-on to the source of emission). The mass median aerodynamic diameter of four aerosolized test dusts ranged from 8 to 25 µm with geometric standard deviations from 1.6 to 2 µm. The performance of each sampler type was compared with that of the SIMPEDS (Higgins-Dewell design) sampler. There was slight evidence to suggest that the performance of the FSP 10 is affected by the direction of the inlet relative to the air flow, although this was not significant when most respirable dust concentrations were compared, possibly due to the variability of paired dust concentration results. The GK 2.69, RASCAL, and PPI 8 samplers had similar performances, although the results when side-on to the emission source were generally slightly lower than the SIMPEDS. Despite slight differences between respirable dust concentrations the respirable crystalline silica values were not significantly different from the SIMPEDS. The GK family of cyclones obtained most precise results and more closely matched the SIMPEDS. A comparison with dust concentration results from previous calm air chamber studies (where wind speeds were < 0.4 m s(-1)) found that the relative performance between samplers was similar to those observed in this work indicating consistent performance relative to the SIMPEDS in both calm and moving air.
authors: 1.The Health and Safety Laboratory, Chemical and Biological Risks Unit, Harpur Hill, Buxton SK 17 9JN, UK; peter.stacey@hsl.gsi.gov.uk.
authors: Peter
authors: P
authors: Stacey
authors: 1.The Health and Safety Laboratory, Chemical and Biological Risks Unit, Harpur Hill, Buxton SK 17 9JN, UK;
authors: Andrew
authors: A
authors: Thorpe
authors: 2.National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Exposure Assessment Branch, 1090 Tusculum Ave, MS R- 5 Cincinnati, OH 45226 USA.
authors: Alan
authors: A
authors: Echt
mesh_terms: D000336:Aerosols / Q000032:analysis*; D000392:Air Movements; D000395:Air Pollutants, Occupational / Q000032:analysis*; D004391:Dust / Q000032:analysis*; D004784:Environmental Monitoring / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D004867:Equipment Design; D006801:Humans; D019570:Inhalation Exposure / Q000032:analysis; D016273:Occupational Exposure / Q000032:analysis*; D010316:Particle Size; D012822:Silicon Dioxide / Q000032:analysis
chemical_list: D000336:Aerosols; D000395:Air Pollutants, Occupational; D004391:Dust; D012822:Silicon Dioxide
keywords: X-ray diffraction.; aerosol sampling; cyclone; high flow rate; particle size; personal impactor sampler; respirable dust; silica