Annals of Occupational Hygiene Advance Access originally published online on July 7, 2004
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 48, No. 5, pp. 383-391, 2004
© 2004 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press
Determinants of Exposure to Metalworking Fluid Aerosol in Small Machine Shops
1 School of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, University of British Columbia, 2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; 2 Department of Health Care and Epidemiology, University of British Columbia, 5804 Fairview Avenue, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
Received 3 July 2003; in final form 30 December 2003; published online on 7 July 2003
The purpose of this study was to evaluate personal exposure to metalworking fluid (MWF) aerosols in very small machine shops (1–8 machinists per shop) and to investigate workplace factors associated with exposures. A total of 20 willing machine shops in Vancouver, Canada (from 46 eligible shops, 43%) and 88 machinists participated (participation rate for machinists 92%). Most machinists wore two personal sampling trains (an open-faced 37 mm cassette and a PM10 impactor) on each of two full work shifts. Observational data were collected regarding potential determinants of exposure at 15 min intervals throughout each shift. A total of 322 personal samples were taken over 54 days. Mean aerosol exposure was 0.32 mg/m3 (range 0.06–2.19) for the 37 mm cassette samples and 0.27 mg/m3 (range 0.026–3.67) for PM10. Exposures from the two sampler types were highly correlated (R = 0.86). The mean shop-specific ratio comparing exposure from the 37 mm cassette with that from the PM10 sampler was 1.43 and varied significantly across shops, ranging from 0.97 to 2.19. Machine, task and shop characteristics associated with significantly increased aerosol exposure included the proportion of time spent grinding, operating an enclosed computer controlled machine, the presence of welding in the shop for both sampler types and the number of machines using MWF for PM10 samples only. Factors associated with reduced aerosol exposure included machining aluminum, milling, the height (and shape) of the shop roof (for both sample types) and the presence of mechanical shop ventilation (for the 37 mm cassette samples).
Keywords: coolant fluid; determinants of exposure; machinists; metalworking fluid; occupational exposure; small machine shops
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. A. Virji, S. R. Woskie, M. Waters, S. Brueck, D. Stancescu, R. Gore, C. Estill, and M. Prince Agreement between Task-Based Estimates of the Full-Shift Noise Exposure and the Full-Shift Noise Dosimetry Ann. Hyg., April 1, 2009; 53(3): 201 - 214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Park, P. A. Stewart, and J. B. Coble Determinants of Exposure to Metalworking Fluid Aerosols: A Literature Review and Analysis of Reported Measurements Ann. Hyg., April 1, 2009; 53(3): 271 - 288. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Lillienberg, A. Burdorf, L. Mathiasson, and L. Thorneby Exposure to Metalworking Fluid Aerosols and Determinants of Exposure Ann. Hyg., October 1, 2008; 52(7): 597 - 605. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Suuronen, M.-L. Henriks-Eckerman, R. Riala, and T. Tuomi Respiratory Exposure to Components of Water-Miscible Metalworking Fluids Ann. Hyg., October 1, 2008; 52(7): 607 - 614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. M. PETERS, W. A. HEITBRINK, D. E. EVANS, T. J. SLAVIN, and A. D. MAYNARD The Mapping of Fine and Ultrafine Particle Concentrations in an Engine Machining and Assembly Facility Ann. Hyg., April 1, 2006; 50(3): 249 - 257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|