Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area

Abstract

The health impacts of suspended particulate matter (SPM) are significantly associated with size—the smaller the aerosol particles, the stronger the biological effect. Quantitative evaluation of fine and ultrafine particles (FP and UFP) is, therefore, an integral part of ongoing epidemiological studies. The mass concentrations of SPM fractions (especially PM2.5, PM1.0, PM0.25) were measured in an industrial area using cascade personal samplers and a gravimetric method, and their mass ratio was determined. The results of PM2.5, PM1.0 were also compared with the reference measurement at stationary stations. The mean ratios PM2.5/SPM, PM1.0/SPM, and PM1.0/PM2.5 were 0.76, 0.65, and 0.86, respectively. Surprisingly, a mass dominance of UFP with an aerodynamic diameter <0.25 μm (PM0.25) was found with mean ratios of 0.43, 0.57, 0.67 in SPM, PM2.5 and PM1.0. The method used showed satisfactory agreement in comparison with reference measurements. The respirable fraction may consist predominantly of UFP. Despite the measures currently being taken to improve air quality, the most biologically efficient UFP can escape and remain in the air. UFP are currently determined primarily as particle number as opposed to the mass concentration used for conventional fractions. This complicates their mutual comparison and determination of individual fraction ratios.

Using particle dimensionality‐based modeling to estimate lung carcinogenicity of 3D printer emissions

“…The shape of the distribution for airborne dust reported by Machaczka et al (2021) is quite similar to the distribution of 3D printer emissions reported in our study, though 3D printers have a lower fraction of the smallest size component compared to larger particles. Although interestingly, the distribution for Machackza's data can be demonstrated as having MMAD of 0.28 μm and GSD of 6.34 (close to Oberdörster's data used in our study, though apparently with a higher level of variation).…”

“…For example, Table 10 demonstrates a comparison of several size fractions of 3D printer emissions to a published PM2.5 size distribution for industrial areas (ambient air data from Machaczka et al, 2021).…”

“…Fraction to PM2.5 in airborne dust (Machaczka et al, 2021) Fraction to PM2.5 in 3D printer emissions Also, the shape of particles is a major factor influencing their toxicity. We included carbon nanotubes in our study, though their aspect ratio can be very high, meaning this type of particle resembles asbestos more than spherical particles like crystalline silica.…”

Indoor air quality and sick building syndrome symptoms in administrative office at public university

“…I/O ratios greater than or equal to 1.2 show that the indoor concentration is higher than the outdoor concentration and could be a result of indoor sources, 0.8–1.2 or greater show that the indoor concentration is equal to the outdoor concentration, and I/O less than or equal to 0.8 show that the indoor concentration is lower than the outdoor concentration, showing the potential for outdoor influence. The amount of outside pollution, the amount of pollution transported indoors, the presence of indoor sources, and the presence of RSP are all factors that affect its presence indoors [ 48 ].…”

Development and Characterization of a Time-Sequenced Cascade Impactor: Application to Transient PM2.5 Pollution Events in Urbanized and Industrialized Environments

“…Air pollution has been identified as the greatest environmental cause of premature deaths, with seven million deaths per year worldwide due to the direct or indirect effects of exposure to air pollutants [1]. Among these pollutants, particulate matter (PM) has the greatest health impact [2], particularly PM2.5 and PM1 because of their ability to penetrate the deeper regions of the respiratory tract [1, [3][4][5]. Although air quality has significantly been improved in high-income countries, PM2.5 exceedances are frequent in large European cities, and a disparity in exposure between highly industrialized/urbanized cities and rural areas is observed [1].…”