透過您的圖書館登入
IP:44.222.82.119
  • 學位論文

製程使用溴丙烷作業勞工暴露測定

Exposure Measurements of 1-Bromopropane for Workers with Its Usage in Manufacturing Processes

指導教授 : 許憲呈

摘要


為了瞭解作業勞工溴丙烷暴露狀況,本研究針對3家製程使用溴丙烷的工廠(以A、B和C表示),進行作業勞工個人空氣暴露及作業環境區域採樣測定。個人溴丙烷暴露樣本採樣於正常8小時工作輪班工作時段內,進行至少採集6小時的全程單一樣本採樣。採樣介質以活性碳管為主,填充吸附劑chromosorb的熱脫附不銹鋼管為輔,搭配分流管連接採樣幫浦,於勞工呼吸區帶實施主動式採樣,對兩種採樣介質的採樣幫浦流量率分別設定約為200及180 mL/min。區域採樣測定也以這兩種介質進行採樣,採樣介質被架於離地約1.5公尺高度,搭配分流管連接採樣幫浦進行採樣,至少採集6小時空氣樣本。所有活性碳則以氣相層析質譜儀(Agilent 6890N/ Agilent 5973N-MSD)分析,熱脫附不銹鋼管以熱脫附儀(PerkinElmer TurboMatrix ATD-50)搭配火焰離子化偵測器氣相層析儀(Agilent-6890)分析,以估計作業勞工及環境區域溴丙烷的8小時時量加權平均暴露濃度。研究中一共針對19位作業勞工,獲得39個個人暴露測定樣本在3個工廠中,獲得122個環境區域測定樣本,所有作業勞工8小時時量加權平均暴露濃度(±標準偏差)為5.58 (±8.63) ppm,在A、B和C 廠三個工廠作業勞工8小時時量加權平均暴露濃度(±標準偏差)分別為0.05 (±0.01) ppm、9.55 (±10.25) ppm和4.28 (±7.66) ppm。環境區域測定濃度,在A、B和C廠三個工廠作業勞工8小時時量加權平均暴露濃度(±標準偏差)分別為2.40 (±1.72) ppm、7.69 (±7.30) ppm和8.93 (±11.59) ppm。無論是個人暴露或是環境區域採樣,活性碳與熱脫附對溴丙烷測定濃度的相關分析,均顯示二者間無統計上顯著意義的相關,意味著以填充chromosorb的熱脫附取代活性碳管實施溴丙烷暴露測定不可行,需要再多加嘗試其他吸附劑。三個工廠作業勞工溴丙烷8小時時量加權平均暴露濃度分別為遠低於、接近1倍和接近1/2倍10 ppm的建議職業暴露限值,顯示勞工溴丙烷暴露在某些作業環境仍需嚴加管控,以減低勞工因溴丙烷暴露可能引發的健康危害風險。

並列摘要


In order to understand workers’ exposure to 1-bromopropane, in this study three factories (symbolized by A, B and C) with the usage of 1-bromopropane in their manufacturing processes were recruited to monitor personal air exposure for workers and environmental air for manufacturing areas. The personal exposure sampling was conducted in a typical 8-hour work shift. A partial period (at least 6 hours) single sample measurement was taken for both personal and environmental sampling. The worker was asked to wear a personal sampling pump equipped with an anasorb tube and a stainless steel thermal desorption tube with chromosorb absorbent. A manifold was connected to the sampling pump to simultaneously set up the flow rates of the anasorb tube and the thermal desorption tube at 200 and 180 mL/min, respectively. The sampling tubes were attached to the worker’s collar for breathing zone sampling. These two types of sampling tubes with the inlet placed at a height of 1.5 meters above the floor were also used for environmental sampling. All of the anasorb tubes were analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (Agilent 6890N/Agilent 5973N-MSD). The thermal desorption tubes were analyzed by a thermal desorbers PerkinElmer TurboMatrix ATD-50) equipped with gas chromatography (Agilent-6890). The 8-hour time weighted average (8-h TWA) exposure of 1-bromopropane was calculated for both personal and environmental measurements. A total of 39 personal samples and 122 environmental samples were collected for 19 workers in the factories. The mean (± standard deviation) of 8-h TWA exposure was 5.578 (±8.627) ppm for all personal measurements. The means (± standard deviations) of personal measurements for A. B and C factories were 0.046 (±0.010) ppm, 9.551 (±10.253) ppm and 4.283 (±7.662) ppm, respectively. The means (± standard deviations) of environmental measurements for A. B and C factories were 2.399 (±1.724) ppm, 7.690 (±7.295) ppm and 8.925 (±11.587) ppm, respectively. There was no statistically significant correlation between 1-bromopropane measurements taken by anasorb tubes and thermal desorption tubes for both personal and environmental sampling. This indicated that it was not possible to use the thermal desorption tube with chromosorb absorbent to replace the anosorb tube for 1-bromopropane sampling. The 8-h TWA exposures of 1-bromopropane for the workers in A, B and C factories were far below, close to one time, and close to 1/2 times of the recommended occupational exposure limit (10 ppm), respectively. Some workers in certain work environments still needed to have careful control for their exposure to 1-bromopropane to reduce the risk of potential health hazard due to 1-bromopropane exposure.

參考文獻


行政院勞動部職業安全衛生署 (2014) 勞工作業場所容許暴露標準,行政院勞動部職業安全衛生署。
NIOSH (2001) Hazard evaluation and technical assistance report: Trilithic Inc., Indianapolis, IN. By Reh CM, Nemhauser JB. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH HETA Report No. 2000-0233-2845.
NIOSH (2002) Hazard evaluation and technical assistance report: STN Cushion Company, Cincinnati, OH. By Harney JM, Hess J, Reh CM, Trout D. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH HETA Report No. 2000-0410-2891.
NIOSH (2003) NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluation Report: Marx Industries, Inc., Sawmills, North Carolina, By Harney JM, Nemhauser JB, Reh CM, Trout D, Schrader S, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH HETA Report No. 99-0260-2906, June 2003.
Hanley KW, Petersen M, Curwin BD, Sanderson WT. (2006) Urinary bromide and breathing zone concentrations of 1-bromopropane from workers exposed to flexible foam spray adhesives, Ann Occup Hyg. 2006 Aug;50(6):599-607.

延伸閱讀