Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SODERHOLM, S. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by SODERHOLM, S. C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 356, 1991
© 1991 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press

correction

Correction

S. C. SODERHOLM

FIGURES 4(a) and (b) have been redrawn after correcting a computer programming error. The last sentence on p. 311 of the original article should now read ‘To obtain the respirable concentration according to the proposed definition, respirable concentrations measured according to the BMRC definition would have to mutiplied by a factor between 0.84 and 1.0 for log-normal size distributions for which {sigma}g > 2 and for which at least 10% of the ambient aerosol is respirable by the BMRC definition.’ Assertions in the Abstract and Summary that the proposed definition differs approximately equally from the BMRC and ACGIH definitions are not entirely accurate, since for log-normal size distribution having {sigma}g > 2 respirable concentrations measured according to the proposed definition would differ less from those measured according to the BMRC definition than from those measured according to the ACGIH definition. Many respirable dust concentrations measured nominally according to the BMRC definition are obtained using cyclone samplers whose collection efficiency curves resemble more those of the ACGIH present and proposed definitions of respirable dust than that of the BMRC definition, so definitive statements about differences between the proposed definition and current practices are difficult. The proposed definition is a compromise which would require current respirable dust measurement practices to be altered slightly to reach international consensus on a single definition. [The corrections do not change the conclusions of the paper.]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.