Skip to main content
Log in

Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk of exposure to metal fume in different types of welding processes

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The international agency for cancer research (IARC) has classified welding fumes as definitive carcinogens. The aim of the present study was to assess health risk due to exposure to welding fumes in different welding types. In this study, exposure to fumes of iron (Fe), chromium (Cr), and nickel (Ni) in the breathing zone air of 31 welder engaged in arc, argon and CO2 welding was assessed. Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk assessments due to exposure to fumes were performed using the method proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Monte Carlo simulation. The results showed that in the CO2 welding, concentration of Ni, Cr, and Fe was lower than the 8-h Time-Weighted Average Threshold Limit Value (TWA-TLV), recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). In argon welding, Cr and Fe concentrations were higher than the TWA-TLV. In arc welding, concentrations of Ni and Fe were more than the TWA-TLV. In addition, the risk of non-carcinogenicity due to exposure to Ni and Fe in all three types of welding was more than standard level (HQ>1). The results indicated that the welders are at health risk due to exposure to metal fumes. Preventive exposure control measures such as local ventilation need to be implemented in welding workplaces.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abtahi M, Fakhri Y, Oliveri Conti G et al (2018) The concentration of BTEX in the air of Tehran: a systematic review-meta analysis and risk assessment. Int J Environ Res Public Health 15:1837

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackah M (2019) Metals in Agbogbloshie E-waste recycling site, Accra, Ghana: distribution, bioaccessibility and health risk assessment. Macquarie University, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahn YS, Park RM, Stayner L et al (2006) Cancer morbidity in iron and steel workers in Korea. Am J Ind Med 49:647–657

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anthony TR (2019) From the Editor: Welding fume issue. Taylor & Francis, pp D23–D24

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakri SFZ, Hariri A, Ismail M (2020) Occupational health risk assessment of inhalation exposure to welding fumes. Int J8:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkhordari A, Sakhvidi MJZ, Sakhvidi FZ et al (2014) Cancer risk assessment in welder’s under different exposure scenarios. Iran J Public Health 43:666

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayat Tork H, Malekan M (2022) Investigating the effect of GTAW parameters on the porosity formation of C70600 copper-nickel alloy. Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly, pp 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • BEIs Ta. (2019) Available at: www.acgih.org/forms/store/ProductFormPublic/2019-tlvs-and-beis-with-7th-edition-documentation-cd-rom-single-user-version.

  • Borská L, Fiala Z, Smejkalová J et al (2003) Health risk of occupational exposure in welding processes I. Genotoxic risk. ACTA MEDICA-HRADEC KRALOVE 46:25–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw LM, Fishwick D, Slater T et al (1998) Chronic bronchitis, work related respiratory symptoms, and pulmonary function in welders in New Zealand. Occup Environ Med 55:150–154

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Buranatrevedh S (2011) Health risk assessment of workers exposed to metals from an aluminium production plant. J Med Assoc Thai 93(12):136

    Google Scholar 

  • Cevik B (2018) The effect of pure argon and mixed gases on microstructural and mechanical properties of S275 structural steel joined by flux-cored arc welding. Kovove Materialy 56:81–87

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cosgrove M (2015) Arc welding and airway disease. Welding in the World 59:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobra G, Iliev S, Cotet L et al (2021) Heavy metals as impurities in the bayer production cycle of the aluminum hydroxide from Sierra Leone bauxite. Preliminary study. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Engineering & Technologies 14(2):151–165

    Google Scholar 

  • EPA (2004) Risk assessment guidance for superfund. Volume I: human health evaluation manual (Part A). Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (USA), pp 1–89

    Google Scholar 

  • EPA (2011) Exposure factors handbook: 2011 edition. US Environmental Protection Agency, p 600

    Google Scholar 

  • EPA. (2017) Use of Monte Carlo simulation in risk assessments. Region 3 Technical guidance manual, risk assessment. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/risk/use-monte-carlo-simulation-risk-assessments.

  • Fakhri Y, Abtahi M, Atamaleki A et al (2019) The concentration of potentially toxic elements (PTEs) in honey: a global systematic review and meta-analysis and risk assessment. Trends Food Sci Technol 91:498–506

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Floros N (2018) Welding fume main compounds and structure. Welding in the World 62:311–316

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn MR, Susi P (2009) Neurological risks associated with manganese exposure from welding operations–a literature review. Int J Hyg Environ Health 212:459–469

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Freire BM, Gonzaga RG, Pedron T et al (2021) Occupational exposure to potentially toxic elements in the foundry industry: an integrated environmental and biological monitoring. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 28:34630–34641

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Golbabaei F, Khadem M (2015) Air pollution in welding processes—assessment and control methods. Current air quality issues, pp 33–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Honaryar MK, Lunn RM, Luce D et al (2019) Welding fumes and lung cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies. Occup Environ Med 76:422–431

    Google Scholar 

  • Jilla A (2019) Evaluation of total fume and heavy metal emission factors applicable to gas metal arc welding.

  • Karimi Zeverdegani S, Mehrifar Y, Faraji M et al (2017) Occupational exposure to welding gases during three welding processes and risk assessment by SQRCA method. J Public Health Epidemiol 6:144–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Khadem M, Golbabaei F, Rahmani A (2017) Occupational exposure assessment of chromium (VI): a review of environmental and biological monitoring. Int J Occup Hyg 9:118–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan MI (2007) Welding science and technology. New Age International

    Google Scholar 

  • Kucera J, Hnatowicz V, Bencko V, et al. (2000) Monitoring of occupational exposure in manufacturing of stainless steel constructions. Part I: Chromium, iron, manganese, molybdenum, nickel and vanadium in the workplace air of stainless steel welders.

  • Kumar K, Kalita H, Zindani D et al (2019) Welding. In: Materials and Manufacturing Processes. Springer, pp 65–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Lautner GM, Carver JC, Konzen RB (1978) Measurement of chromium VI and chromium III in stainless steel welding fumes with electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis and neutron activation analysis. Am Ind Hyg Assoc 39:651–660

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lehnert M, Pesch B, Lotz A et al (2012) Exposure to inhalable, respirable, and ultrafine particles in welding fume. Ann Occup Hyg 56:557–567

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mansouri N, Atbi F, Moharamnezhad N et al (2008) Gravimetric and analytical evaluation of welding fume in an automobile part manufacturing factory. JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN HEALTH SCIENCES (JRHS)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mocevic E, Kristiansen P, Bonde JP (2015) Risk of ischemic heart disease following occupational exposure to welding fumes: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 88:259–272

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Modenesi P, De Avelar R (1999) The influence of small variations of wire characteristics on gas metal arc welding process stability. J Mater Process Technol 86:226–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulin JJ, Wild P, Haguenoer JM et al (1993) A mortality study among mild steel and stainless steel welders. Occup Environ Med 50:234–243

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • (NIOSH) NIfOSaH (1994) NIOSH manual of analytical methods, 4th edn. DHHS Publication, pp 94–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesch B, Kendzia B, Hauptmann K et al (2015) Airborne exposure to inhalable hexavalent chromium in welders and other occupations: estimates from the German MEGA database. Int J Hyg Environ Health 218:500–506

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rahimimoghadam S, Layegh Tizabi MN, Khanjani N et al (2022) Carcinogenic risk assessment and changes in spirometric indices in casting and welding workers exposed to metal fumes. Asian Pac J Cancer 23:2743–2748

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rahimnejad S, Bahrami A, Asari M et al (1970) Quantitative risk assessment of occupational exposure to volatile organic compounds in the oil-dependent chemical industry. Journal of Sabzevar university of medical sciences 21:829–841

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivera-Velasquez MF, Fallico C, Guerra I et al (2013) A comparison of deterministic and probabilistic approaches for assessing risks from contaminated aquifers: an Italian case study. Waste Manag Res 31:1245–1254

    Google Scholar 

  • Roach LL (2018) The relationship of welding fume exposure, smoking, and pulmonary function in welders. Workplace Health Saf 66:34–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein RY, Kroese DP (2016) Simulation and the Monte Carlo method. John Wiley & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahihazar ZM, Ghahramani A, Galvani S et al (2022) Probabilistic health risk assessment of occupational exposure to crystalline silica in an iron foundry in Urmia, Iran. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(54):82014–82029

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sanjari A, Saeedi R, Khaloo SS (2021) Semi-quantitative health risk assessment of exposure to chemicals in an aluminum rolling mill. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 27:597–604

    Google Scholar 

  • Satheesh Kumar K, Selvakumar P, Uvanshankar K et al (2021) Investigation on the effect of technological parameters on emission factor In 316L stainless steel using gas metal arc welding. Arch Metall Mater 66:609–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraufnagel DE (2020) The health effects of ultrafine particles. Exp Mol Med 52:311–317

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soltanpour Z, Rasoulzadeh Y, Mohammadian Y (2022) Occupational exposure to metal fumes among iranian welders: systematic review and simulation-based health risk assessment. Biol Trace Elem Res 201(3):1090–1100

    Google Scholar 

  • Soltanpour Z, Rasoulzadeh Y, Ansarin K et al (2023) Micronucleus assay of DNA damage among welders: effects of welding processes. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen 887:503598

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen AR, Thulstrup AM, Hansen J et al (2007) Risk of lung cancer according to mild steel and stainless steel welding. Scand J Work Environ Health 33:379–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Szram J, Schofield SJ, Cosgrove MP et al (2013) Welding, longitudinal lung function decline and chronic respiratory symptoms: a systematic review of cohort studies. Eur Respir J 42:1186–1193

    Google Scholar 

  • Tashiro S, Murphy AB, Tanaka M (2018) Numerical simulation of fume formation process in GMA welding. Welding in the World 62:1331–1339

    Google Scholar 

  • Tola S, Koskela R-S, Hernberg S et al (1979) Lung cancer mortality among iron foundry workers. J Occup Med 21:753–760

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tong R, Cheng M, Yang X et al (2019) Exposure levels and health damage assessment of dust in a coal mine of Shanxi Province, China. Process Saf Environ Prot 128:184–192

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yarmohammadi H, Hamidvand E, Abdollahzadeh D et al (2016) Measuring concentration of welding fumes in respiratory zones of welders: an ergo-toxicological approach. Res J Med Sci 10:111–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Yazdi M (2018) Risk assessment based on novel intuitionistic fuzzy-hybrid-modified TOPSIS approach. Saf Sci 110:438–448

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarandi SM, Shahsavani A, Khodagholi F et al (2019) Concentration, sources and human health risk of heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons bound PM 2.5 ambient air, Tehran, Iran. Environ Geochem Health 41:1473–1487

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to all those who have helped in carrying out the research.

Funding

This study was financially supported by the National Institute for Medical Research Development (NIMAD) (number: 989904).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Y.M. and Kh. A, and Y.R. designed and directed the project, Z. S, Y. M and E.S. collected and analyzed the samples. Z. H, Y. R and E.S. assisted in the analysis of samples and interpreted the results. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yousef Mohammadian.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was approved by Iran National Committee for Ethics in Biomedical Research (IR.NIMAD.REC.1399.124).

Consent for publication

This manuscript does not contain individual person’s data.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Soltanpour, Z., Rasoulzadeh, Y., Ansarin, K. et al. Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk of exposure to metal fume in different types of welding processes. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30, 83728–83734 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28258-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28258-6

Keywords

Navigation