Significant strides have been made in optimizing the design of filtration and pressurization systems used on the enclosed cabs of mobile mining equipment to reduce respirable dust and provide the best air quality to the equipment operators. Considering all of the advances made in this area, one aspect that still needed to be evaluated was a comparison of the efficiencies of the different filters used in these systems. As high-efficiency particulate arrestance (HEPA) filters provide the highest filtering efficiency, the general assumption would be that they would also provide the greatest level of protection to workers. Researchers for the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) speculated, based upon a previous laboratory study, that filters with minimum efficiency reporting value, or MERV rating, of 16 may be a more appropriate choice than HEPA filters in most cases for the mining industry. A study was therefore performed comparing HEPA and MERV 16 filters on two kinds of underground limestone mining equipment, a roof bolter and a face drill, to evaluate this theory. Testing showed that, at the 95-percent confidence level, there was no statistical difference between the efficiencies of the two types of filters on the two kinds of mining equipment. As the MERV 16 filters were less restrictive, provided greater airflow and cab pressurization, cost less and required less-frequent replacement than the HEPA filters, the MERV 16 filters were concluded to be the optimal choice for both the roof bolter and the face drill in this comparative-analysis case study. Another key finding of this study is the substantial improvement in the effectiveness of filtration and pressurization systems when using a final filter design.

Many different types of surface mining equipment use enclosed cabs to protect equipment operators from health and safety hazards. The overburden removal and mining process can be extremely dusty and can cause excessive dust exposure. To study this issue, a cooperative research effort was established between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Silica Co., Clean Air Filter Co., and Red Dot Corp. in an effort to lower respirable dust levels in an enclosed cab on an older surface drill at a silica sand operation. Throughout this research effort, a number of modifications were incorporated into the drill's filtration and pressurization system, as well as in other areas, to improve its design and performance. An average cab efficiency of 93.4% was determined with gravimetric sampling instruments when comparing the outside with the inside cab dust levels on the final design. Although this study considered just one operation, the goal was to identify cost-effective improvements that could be implemented on all types of enclosed cabs to lower respirable dust concentrations. Two critical components for an effective enclosed cab system are having a properly designed, installed, and maintained filtration and pressurization system, along with a method for maintaining structural cab integrity, which allows the cab to be positively pressurized. Another important component is maintaining cab cleanliness. Although this research was originally directed toward the mining industry, it is also applicable to agricultural or construction equipment.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) cooperated with 3M Company in the design and testing of a new environmentally controlled primary crusher operator booth at the company’s Wausau granite quarry near Wausau, WI. This quarry had an older crusher booth without a central heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system, and without an air filtration and pressurization system. A new replacement operator booth was designed and installed by 3M based on design considerations from past NIOSH research on enclosed cab filtration systems. NIOSH conducted pre-testing of the old booth and post-testing of the new booth to assess the new filtration and pressurization system’s effectiveness in controlling airborne dusts and particulates. The booth’s dust and particulate control effectiveness is described by its protection factor, expressed as a ratio of the outside to inside concentrations measured during testing. Results indicate that the old booth provided negligible airborne respirable dust protection and low particulate protection from the outside environment. The newly installed booth provided average respirable dust protection factors from 2 to 25 over five shifts of dust sampling with occasional worker ingress and egress from the booth, allowing some unfiltered contaminants to enter the enclosure. Shorter-term particle count testing outside and inside the booth under near-steady-state conditions, with no workers entering or exiting the booth, resulted in protection factors from 35 to 127 on 0.3- to 1.0-μm respirable size particulates under various HVAC airflow operating conditions.

No abstract

No abstract