Browse > Article

Validation of an Extraction Method for the Determination of Airborne MWFs using Alternative Solvents  

Jeong, Jee Yeon (Dept. of Occupational and Environment Health, Yong-In University)
Baek, Nam Won (Department of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene / v.16, no.2, 2006 , pp. 91-100 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to validate alternative method by using non-carcinogenic, and less toxic solvents than NIOSH analytical method 5524 for measuring the airborne MWFs in workplaces. In laboratory tests, the ETM solvents(mixture of same volume for ethyl ether, toluene, and ethanol) were selected. The alternative method of analyzing MWFs, referred to as the ETM solvent extraction method, showed 0.04 mg/sample as LOD, and 0.15 mg/sample as LOQ. The analytical precision (pooled CV, coefficient of variation) of the ETM solvent extraction method for analyzing the straight, soluble, semisynthetic, and synthetic metalworking fluid was 1.5%, 2.0%, 2.6%, 1.6%, respectively, which was similar to the precision (2.6%) of NIOSH analytical method (NIOSH 0500) for total dust. The analytical accuracy by recovery test, spiked mass calculated as extractable mass, was almost 100%. As the result of storage stability test, metalworking fluid samples should be stored in refrigerated condition, and be analyzed in two weeks after sampling. The 95% confidence limit of the estimated total standard error for the ETM solvent extraction method for analyzing the straight, soluble, semisynthetic, and synthetic metalworking fluid was ${\pm}12.6%$, ${\pm}12.5%$, ${\pm}14.0%$, and ${\pm}13.6%$, respectively, which satisfied the OSHA sampling and analytical criteria.
Keywords
metalworking fluids; solvent extraction gravimetric method; accuracy; precision; sample stability;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 노동부. 화학물질 및 물리적인자의 노출기준 (고시 제 2002-8호). 노동부;2002
2 Burright, D., Y. Chan, M. Edie, C. Elskamp, et al. Evaluation of guidelines for air sampling methods utilizing chromatographic analysis. Salt Lake City, UT; OSHA Salt Lake Technical center; 1999
3 National Institutes of Health (NIH). U.S. National Toxicological Program: Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of dichloromethane (methylene chloride) in F344/rats and B6C3F1 mice (inhalation studies). Research Triangle park, NC; NIH;1986
4 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Guidelines for air sampling and analytical method development and evaluation [DHHS (NIOSH) Pub. No. 95-117]. Cincinnati, OH; NIOSH; 1995
5 Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). IMIS 5010, 9135 [Online]. 2005a. Available from: http://www.osha. gov/dts/chemicalsampling/toc/toc_chemsamp.html
6 Parkinson, A. Chapter 6. Biotransformation of xenobiotics. In Casarett and Doull's Toxicology. sixth edition, New York; McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.; 2001. pp.133-224
7 American Chemical Society(ACS) Subcommittee on Environmental Improvement. Principles of environmental analysis. Anal Chem 1983;55:2210-2218   DOI
8 American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). Documentation of the threshold limit values and biological exposure indices, 7th ed. Cincinnati, OH; ACGIH; 2001
9 Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Occupational exposure to methylene chloride-68:1494-1619 [Online]. 2005b. Available from: http://www.osha.gov/dts/ oshaweb
10 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Method 0500, In NIOSH pocket guide to chemical hazards and other databases [DHHS (NIOSH) Pub. No.2000-130]. Cincinnati, OH; NIOSH; 2000
11 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Method 5524, In NIOSH manual of analytical method, 4th ed. P.M. Eller(ed.), [DHHS (NIOSH) Pub. No.2003-154]. Cincinnati, OH; NIOSH; 2003
12 Intemational Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Dichloromethane. In monograph on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to human, some halogenated hydrocarbons and pesticide exposures. Lyon, France; IARC;1986
13 American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). Threshold Limit Values (TLVs${\circledr}$) for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents and Biological Exposure Indices (BEIs${\circledr}$). Cincinnati, OH; ACGIH; 2005
14 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Pocket guide to chemical hazards [DHHS (NIOSH) Pub. No. 97-140]. Cincinnati, OH; NIOSH; 1997
15 Safety Executive (HSE). Method 95/2, In methods for the Health and determination of hazardous substance (MDHS). HSE;2003
16 Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Evaluation scheme for methods that use filters as the collection medium, In OSHA Analytical Methods Manual. 2nd ed. Salt Lake City, UT; OSHA Salt Lake City Analytical Laboratory;1990
17 Ford Motor Company. Sampling and analytical method for metalworking fluids, method No. FIH-005. Ford; 1995
18 Leith, D., F.A. Leith, and M.G. Boundy. Laboratory measurements of oil mist concentrations using filters and an electrostatic precipitator. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1996;57:1137-1141   DOI
19 Health and Safety Executive (HSE.). Method 84, In methods for the determination of hazardous substance (MDHS). HSE; 1999
20 Glaser, R.A, S. Shulman, R. Kirimo, and G. Piacitelli. Evaluation of an ASTM method for metal working fluids in a survey of metal working facilities. J Test Eval 2002;30:439-451   DOI   ScienceOn
21 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Provisional standard test method for metal removal aerosol in workplace atmosphere, Method PS 42-97. PA; ASTM;1997
22 Kenyon, E.M., K. Hammond, K. Shatkin, J. Wolskie, et al. Ethanolamine exposures of workers using machining fluids in the automotive parts manufacturing industry. Appl Occup and Environ Hyg 1993;8(7):655-661   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Harper, M. Extraction metalworking fluid aerosol samples in cassettes by provisional ASTM and NIOSH methods. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 2002;63:488-492   DOI   ScienceOn