No abstract

There is a need to evaluate nanoparticle (< 100 nm) exposures in occupational settings. However, portable instruments do not size segregate particles in that size range. A proxy method for determining nanoparticle count concentrations involves subtracting counts made with a condensation particle counter (CPC) from those of an optical particle counter/sizer (OPC), resulting in an estimation of "very fine" particles < 300 nm, where 300 nm is the OPC lower detection limit. However, to determine size distributions from which particles < 100 nm may be estimated, the resulting count of particles < 300 nm can be used as an additional channel of count data in addition to those obtained from the OPC. To test these methods, the very fine number concentrations determined using a CPC and OPC were compared with those from SMPS measurements and were used to verify the accuracy of a very fine particle number concentration determined by an OPC and CPC. Two "size-distribution" methods, weighted-average and log-probit, were applied to reproduce particle size distributions from OPC and CPC data and were then evaluated relative to their ability to accurately estimate the nanoparticle number concentrations. Various engineered nanoparticles were used to create test aerosols, including titanium dioxide (TiO(2)), silicon dioxide (SiO(2)), and iron oxide (Fe(2)O(3)). These materials were chosen because of their different refractive indices and therefore may be measured differently by the OPC. The count-difference method was able to estimate very fine particle number concentrations with an error between 10.9 to 58.4%. In estimating nanoparticle number concentrations using the size-distribution methods, the log-probit method resulted in the lowest percent errors that ranged from -42% to 1023%. Percent error was lower than the instrument manufacturer's indicated level of accuracy when the test aerosol refractive index was similar to that used for OPC calibration standards. Accuracy could be increased if there was an increase in the size resolution for number concentrations measured by the CPC of very fine particles and mitigation of optical effects.

Statistical confidence in a single measure of filter penetration (P) is dependent on the low number of particle counts made downstream of the filter. This paper discusses methods for determining an upper confidence limit (UCL) for a single measure of penetration. The magnitude of the UCL was then compared to the P value, UCL ≤ 2P, as a penetration acceptance criterion (PAC). This statistical method was applied to penetration trials involving an N95 filtering facepiece respirator challenged with sodium chloride and four engineered nanoparticles: titanium dioxide, iron oxide, silicon dioxide and single-walled carbon nanotubes. Ten trials were performed for each particle type with the aim of determining the most penetrating particle size (MPPS) and the maximum penetration, Pmax. The PAC was applied to the size channel containing the MPPS. With those P values that met the PAC for a given set of trials, an average Pmax and MPPS was computed together with corresponding standard deviations. Because the size distribution of the silicon dioxide aerosol was shifted towards larger particles relative to the MPPS, none of the ten trials satisfied the PAC for that aerosol. The remaining four particle types resulted in at least 4 trials meeting the criterion. MPPS values ranged from 35 – 53 nm with average Pmax values varying from 4.0% for titanium dioxide to 7.0% for iron oxide. The use of the penetration acceptance criterion is suggested for determining the reliability of penetration measurements obtained to determine filter Pmax and MPPS.