In the EU, there is an increasing need for regulatory agencies to establish health-based threshold limits for airborne particles. A prerequisite for such projects is the validation and comparison of existing and newly developed particle analyzers. Corresponding proficiency tests have often been conducted with the help of inter-laboratory tests using test aerosols. Although test aerosols in the micro- and the nanoscale range were produced with different generator systems at the technical center of the Institute for the Research on Hazardous Substances (IGF) in Dortmund, a stable and reproducible method of producing a low number concentration for nano-sized particles was not achieved. Inspired by a method of monodisperse droplet generation, we coupled a flame generator with a droplet generator and examined the concentration and the diameter of the formed particles as a consequence of the precursor concentration and the droplet frequency. In addition, the reproducibility of the method was tested daily, and the nanoparticles were collected and characterized microscopically. Finally, the measurements of the particle size distribution were mathematically examined. The resulting fits enable the prediction of the median particle diameter as a function of the precursor concentration and the frequency of the droplets. Overall, the performed experiments confirm that this system meets all the requirements with regard to a low number concentration and long-term stability and reproducibility and should therefore be suitable for further inter-laboratory round robin tests.

Exposure to ceramic powders, which is frequent during handling operations, is known to cause adverse health effects. Finding proxy parameters to quantify exposure is useful for efficient and timely exposure assessments. Worker exposure during handling of five materials [a silica sand (SI1), three quartzes (Q1, Q2, and Q3), and a kaolin (K1)] with different particle shape (prismatic and platy) and sizes (3.4-120 µm) was assessed. Materials handling was simulated using a dry pendular mill under two different energy settings (low and high). Three repetitions of two kilos of material were carried out per material and energy conditions with a flow rate of 8-11 kg h-1. The performance of the dustiness index as a predictor of worker exposure was evaluated correlating material's dustiness indexes (with rotating drum and continuous drop) with exposure concentrations. Significant impacts on worker exposure in terms of inhalable and respirable mass fractions were detected for all materials. Mean inhalable mass concentrations during background were always lower than 40 µg m-3 whereas during material handling under high energy settings mean concentrations were 187, 373, 243, 156, and 430 µg m-3 for SI1, Q1, Q2, Q3, and K1, respectively. Impacts were not significant with regard to particle number concentration: background particle number concentrations ranged between 10 620 and 46 421 cm-3 while during handling under high energy settings they were 20 880 - 40 498 cm-3. Mean lung deposited surface area during background ranged between 27 and 101 μm2 cm-3 whereas it ranged between 22 and 42 μm2 cm-3 during materials handling. TEM images evidenced the presence of nanoparticles (≤100 nm) in the form of aggregates (300 nm-1 µm) in the worker area, and a slight reduction on mean particle size during handling was detected. Dustiness and exposure concentrations showed a high degree of correlation (R2 = 0.77-0.97) for the materials and operating conditions assessed, suggesting that dustiness could be considered a relevant predictor for workplace exposure. Nevertheless, the relationship between dustiness and exposure is complex and should be assessed for each process, taking into account not only material behaviour but also energy settings and workplace characteristics.

Personal monitors based on unipolar diffusion charging (miniDiSC/DiSCmini, NanoTracer, Partector) can be used to assess the individual exposure to nanoparticles in different environments. The charge acquired by the aerosol particles is nearly proportional to the particle diameter and, by coincidence, also nearly proportional to the alveolar lung-deposited surface area (LDSA), the metric reported by all three instruments. In addition, the miniDiSC/DiSCmini and the NanoTracer report particle number concentration and mean particle size. In view of their use for personal exposure studies, the comparability of these personal monitors was assessed in two measurement campaigns. Altogether 29 different polydisperse test aerosols were generated during the two campaigns, covering a large range of particle sizes, morphologies and concentrations. The data provided by the personal monitors were compared with those obtained from reference instruments: a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS) for LDSA and mean particle size and a ultrafine particle counter (UCPC) for number concentration. The results indicated that the LDSA concentrations and the mean particle sizes provided by all investigated instruments in this study were in the order of ±30% of the reference value obtained from the SMPS when the particle sizes of the test aerosols generated were within 20–400nm and the instruments were properly calibrated. Particle size, morphology and concentration did not have a major effect within the aforementioned limits. The comparability of the number concentrations was found to be slightly worse and in the range of ±50% of the reference value obtained from the UCPC. In addition, a minor effect of the particle morphology on the number concentration measurements was observed. The presence of particles >400nm can drastically bias the measurement results of all instruments and all metrics determined.

Wearing of personal monitors for nanoparticle exposure studies does not affect the measurement performance compared to laboratory studies.

Exposure to airborne agents needs to be assessed in the personal breathing zone by the use of personal measurement equipment. Specific measurement devices for assessing personal exposure to airborne nanomaterials have only become available in the recent years. They can be differentiated into direct-reading personal monitors and personal samplers that collect the airborne nanomaterials for subsequent analyses. This article presents a review of the available personal monitors and samplers and summarizes the available literature regarding their accuracy, comparability and field applicability. Due to the novelty of the instruments, the number of published studies is still relatively low. Where applicable, literature data is therefore complemented with published and unpublished results from the recently finished nanoIndEx project. The presented data show that the samplers and monitors are robust and ready for field use with sufficient accuracy and comparability. However, several limitations apply, e.g. regarding the particle size range of the personal monitors and their in general lower accuracy and comparability compared with their stationary counterparts. The decision whether a personal monitor or a personal sampler shall be preferred depends strongly on the question to tackle. In many cases, a combination of a personal monitor and a personal sampler may be the best choice to obtain conclusive results.

OBJECTIVE:Dust sample mass gain is too smaller to satisfy the limit of detection (LOD) even in most cases during dust sampling at workplaces nowdays, especially for respirable fraction. Therefore, it is aimed to solve the problem by increasing sample load with high flow rate samplers. METHODS:In A and B two shipyards respirable welding fume was sampled by high flow rate cyclone samplers of FSP-10 (10 L/min) for 2-2.5 hours and normal flow rate FSP-2 (2 L/min) for 3-4 hours with a stratigy of parallele sampling at the same workpalce, in order to compare their mass gain, coincidence rate with LOD, and airborn dust concentration. RESULTS:Sample mass gain of 0.97±0.40 mg and 1.61±0.86 mg respectively in the two factories by FSP-10 was significantly higher than that of 0.29±0.12 mg and 0.51±0.27 mg by FSP-2 (t-test, P<0.05 in both cases) , increasing herewith the coincidence rate with LOD from 26.8% (when sampling with FSP-2, calculated together with samples of the two factories) to 89.7%. However there was no significant difference in dust concentrations by the two different samplers, 0.53±1.88 vs 0.73±1.61 mg/m(3) by FSP-2 and FSP-10 in the shipyard A and 1.14±1.78 vs 1.01±1.63 mg/m(3) in the factory B (t-test, P>0.05 in every case) . In addtion, sample loading by FSP-2 was found to be correlated to sampling time (R(2)=0.7906, y=0.002 6x) , therefore, it has to sample for ≥192.3 min to meet the LOD (0.5 mg) in case of normal flow rate. CONCLUSION:By using of high flow rate cyclone FSP-10 the problem of LOD could be solved, along with increased sample mass and similar respirable dust concentration by the two samplers. Some techincal improvements of FSP-10 and increasing of LOD coincidence rate by other methods was also disscussed.

Responsible development of any technology, including nanotechnology, requires protecting workers, the first people to be exposed to the products of the technology. In the case of nanotechnology, this is difficult to achieve because in spite of early evidence raising health and safety concerns, there are uncertainties about hazards and risks. The global response to these concerns has been the issuance by authoritative agencies of precautionary guidance to strictly control exposures to engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). This commentary summarizes discussions at the “Symposium on the Health Protection of Nanomaterial Workers” held in Rome (25 and 26 February 2015). There scientists and practitioners from 11 countries took stock of what is known about hazards and risks resulting from exposure to ENMs, confirmed that uncertainties still exist, and deliberated on what it would take to conduct a global assessment of how well workers are being protected from potentially harmful exposures.

OBJECTIVES:Working in mines and quarries has been associated with an elevated lung cancer risk but with inconsistent results for coal miners. This study aimed to estimate the smoking-adjusted lung cancer risk among coal miners and compare the risk pattern with lung cancer risks among ore miners and quarrymen.METHODS:We estimated lung cancer risks of coal and ore miners and quarrymen among 14 251 lung cancer cases and 17 267 controls from the SYNERGY pooled case-control study, controlling for smoking and employment in other at-risk occupations.RESULTS:Ever working as miner or quarryman (690 cases, 436 controls) was associated with an elevated odds ratio (OR) of 1.55 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.34-1.79] for lung cancer. Ore miners (53 cases, 24 controls) had a higher OR (2.34, 95% CI 1.36-4.03) than quarrymen (67 cases, 39 controls; OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.21-3.05) and coal miners (442 cases, 297 controls; OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.18-1.67), but CI overlapped. We did not observe trends by duration of exposure or time since last exposure.CONCLUSIONS:This pooled analysis of population-based studies demonstrated an excess lung cancer risk among miners and quarrymen that remained increased after adjustment for detailed smoking history and working in other at-risk occupations. The increase in risk among coal miners were less pronounced than for ore miners or quarrymen.

At the current state of development, exposure assessment of nanoparticles and their agglomerates and aggregates (NOAA) cannot be regarded as clear and internationally harmonized. Many aspects like metric to be used, nature of background treatment, use of a “tiered approach,” and others still need a lot more research and international standardization. This chapter gives some recommendations on planning, execution, and documentation of exposure assessment and suggests some kind of general categorization of the various types.

Quality control of measurement devices is not the task of a single party but a joint effort of manufacturers and users. The application of external control measures, like round-robin tests, is very much encouraged.

Objective: Workplace aerosol sampling is challenged by its influencing factors and methodological limitations. Some factors, including blank setting, electrostatic effect, sample mass gain, and limit of detection (LOD), were studied to characterize them further and thereby to improve the sampling method. Methods: Through a field sampling in two shipyards and by an analysis of a large amount of dust data from different industries, the influencing factors were comparatively studied with emphasis on their effect on the final result. Results: After calibration with field blanks, the concentrations of most sample types in the shipyards decreased significantly, varying by as much as -24.3% of the final measurements. After laboratory blank calibration, dust concentrations increased or decreased without a definite change trend. With a variation of -1.8%, only the measurements of Chinese "total dust" sampled with polypropylene filters were significantly influenced by the electrostatic effect. The LOD coincidence rate was only 17.3% for American respirable dust in different industries and 12.2% for respirable particles collected by normal flow rate samplers (FSP2) in the shipyards. The latter increased to 73.9% when high flow samplers (FSP10) were used. Conclusions: It was suggested that field blank calibration was the predominant influencing factor in comparison with electrostatic effect and laboratory blank adjustment. The LOD coincidence rate was too low for reliable sampling, and this might be improved by use of high flow samplers.