Workplace performance of a loose-fitting powered air purifying respirator during nanoparticle synthesis
Nanoparticle (particles with diameter ≤100 nm) exposure is recognized as a potentially harmful size fraction for pulmonary particle exposure. During nanoparticle synthesis, the number concentrations in the process room may exceed 10 × 106 cm−3. During such conditions, it is essential that the occupants in the room wear highly reliable high-performance respirators to prevent inhalation exposure. Here we have studied the in-use program protection factor (PPF) of loose-fitting powered air purifying respirators, while workers were coating components with TiO2 or Cu x O y nanoparticles under a hood using a liquid flame spray process. The PPF was measured using condensation particle counters, an electrical low pressure impactor, and diffusion chargers. The room particle concentrations varied from 4 × 106 to 40 × 106 cm−3, and the count median aerodynamic diameter ranged from 32 to 180 nm. Concentrations inside the respirator varied from 0.7 to 7.2 cm−3. However, on average, tidal breathing was assumed to increase the respirator concentration by 2.3 cm−3. The derived PPF exceeded 1.1 × 106, which is more than 40 × 103 times the respirator assigned protection factor. We were unable to measure clear differences in the PPF of respirators with old and new filters, among two male and one female user, or assess most penetrating particle size. This study shows that the loose-fitting powered air purifying respirator provides very efficient protection against nanoparticle inhalation exposure if used properly.
KeywordsAir purifying respirator Protection factor Respirator performance Occupational safety Filtration Aerosol
This work was made in close collaboration with Ms. Elina Miettinen and Mr. Janne Haapanen at Aerosol Physics Laboratory, and Mr. Tomi Kanerva at Department of Material Sciences, Tampere University of Technology.
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013] under EC-GA No. 604305 ‘SUN’.
- AIHA (2002) Respiratory protection committee: respirator performance terminology. Letter to the Editor. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 63:132Google Scholar
- Brochot C, Michielsen N, Chazelet S, Thomas D (2012) Measurement of protection factor of respiratory protective devices toward nanoparticles. Ann Occup Hyg 56:595–605Google Scholar
- Cheng YS (2001) Condensation detection and diffusion size separation techniques. In: Baron PA, Willeke K (eds) Aerosol measurements: principles, techniques and applications. Wiley-Interscience, New York, pp 569–601Google Scholar
- Code of Federal Regulations (2006) Title 29 (6), Respiratory Protection, Section 1910.134. pp 419–444Google Scholar
- Cohen HJ, Hecker LH, Mattheis DK et al (2001) Simulated workplace protection factor study of powered air-purifying and supplied air respirators. Am Ind Hyg Assoc 62:595–604Google Scholar
- ECETOC (2004) ECETOC targeted risk assessment. Technical Report No. 93, European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
- Givehchi R, Tan Z (2014) An overview of airborne nanoparticle filtration and thermal rebound theory. Aerosol Air Qual Res 14:45–63Google Scholar
- Harrison B, Liang S (2005) Quantitative fit testing of military gas masks with the TSI Portacount. Part II: quantifying the limitations and recommendations for use. JISRP 22:55–67Google Scholar
- Huang S-H, Chen C-W, Kuo Y-M, Lai C-Y, McKay R, Chen C-C (2013) Factors affecting filter penetration and quality factor of particulate respirators. Aerosol Air Qual Res 13:162–171Google Scholar
- ISO (2008) Nanotechnologies—terminology and definitions for nanoobjects—nanoparticle, nanofibre and nanoplate. International Organization for Standardization. ISO TS 27687Google Scholar
- Koivisto AJ, Palomäki JE, Viitanen A-K, Siivola KM, Koponen IK, Yu M, Kanerva TS, Norppa H, Alenius HT, Hussein T, Savolainen KM, Hämeri KJ (2014) Range-finding risk assessment of inhalation exposure to nanodiamonds in a laboratory environment. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11(5):5382–5402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Li L, Zuo Z, Japuntich DA, Pui DYH (2012) Evaluation of filter media for particle number, surface area and mass penetrations. Ann Occup Hyg 56:581–594Google Scholar
- OSHA US Department of Labor (2009) Assigned protection factors for the revised respiratory protection standard. OSHA 3352-02Google Scholar
- Savolainen K, Pylkkänen L, Norppa H, Falck G, Lindberg H, Tuomi T, Vippola M, Alenius H, Hämeri K, Koivisto J, Brouwer D, Mark D, Bard D, Berges M, Jankowska E, Posniak M, Farmer P, Singh R, Krombach F, Bihari P, Kasper G, Seipenbusch M (2010) Nanotechnologies, engineered nanomaterials and occupational health and safety—a review. Saf Sci 48:957–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Strak M, Janssen NAH, Godri KJ, Gosens I, Mudway IS, Cassee FR, Lebret E, Kelly FJ, Harrison RM, Brunekreef B, Steenhof M, Hoek G (2012) Respiratory health effects of airborne particulate matter: the role of particle size, composition, and oxidative potential—the RAPTES project. Environ Health Perspect 120:1183–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar