These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Field comparison of 37-mm closed-face cassettes and IOM samplers.
    Author: Demange M, Görner P, Elcabache JM, Wrobel R.
    Journal: Appl Occup Environ Hyg; 2002 Mar; 17(3):200-8. PubMed ID: 11871756.
    Abstract:
    On examining the published results of comparisons of sampling with Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM) (Edinburgh, U.K.) samplers and 37-mm closed-face cassettes it was observed that they usually do not take into account the dust deposited on the walls of the cassettes. As the method used by the Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité, France (INRS), to analyze metals includes the analysis of these deposits, it was decided to evaluate the differences obtained between these samplers when using this method. The essays were conducted in three different plants, and repetitive static samplings were carried out to compare 2 L/min, IOM cassettes and 1 or 2 L/min 37-mm closed-face cassettes. The airborne particles were also sampled simultaneously for granulometric analysis. Gravimetric determinations of sampled aerosol were obtained by weighing 37-mm filters and IOM cassettes, and the aerosol collected on the filters and the particles deposited on the walls were analyzed separately for both types of samplers by atomic spectrometry for metals content. The intra-sampler variability and inter-sampler ratios were then determined. Although results obtained for gravimetric analysis are comparable to those published elsewhere (ratio IOM/37-mm much higher than 1), the metal analysis revealed a close agreement between the results obtained with the three sampling methods tested when the wall deposits were taken into account. As published previously, the ratio of wall deposits to filter collected aerosol for 37-mm cassettes is variable, and it would appear to be very difficult to find an appropriate correction factor applicable when only the filter is analyzed. Were these results to be confirmed by further experiments, sampling with 37-mm closed-faced at 1 or 2 L/min or with an IOM sampler would be equivalent for all pollutants for which the analytical method allows the recovery of walls deposit.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]