People | Locations | Statistics |
---|---|---|
Naji, M. |
| |
Motta, Antonella |
| |
Aletan, Dirar |
| |
Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
Ertürk, Emre |
| |
Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
Kononenko, Denys |
| |
Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
Bih, L. |
| |
Casati, R. |
| |
Muller, Hermance |
| |
Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
Azam, Siraj |
| |
Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
Blanpain, Bart |
| |
Ali, M. A. |
| |
Popa, V. |
| |
Rančić, M. |
| |
Ollier, Nadège |
| |
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
Landes, Michael |
| |
Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Ribalta, Carla
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (5/5 displayed)
- 2021Characterizing the Chemical Profile of Incidental Ultrafine Particles for Toxicity Assessment Using an Aerosol Concentratorcitations
- 2019Modeling of High Nanoparticle Exposure in an Indoor Industrial Scenario with a One-Box Modelcitations
- 2019Modeling of High Nanoparticle Exposure in an Indoor Industrial Scenario with a One-Box Modelcitations
- 2019On the Relationship between Exposure to Particles and Dustiness during Handling of Powders in Industrial Settingscitations
- 2019Workplace Exposure to Nanoparticles during Thermal Spraying of Ceramic Coatingscitations
Places of action
Organizations | Location | People |
---|
article
Modeling of High Nanoparticle Exposure in an Indoor Industrial Scenario with a One-Box Model
Abstract
<jats:p>Mass balance models have proved to be effective tools for exposure prediction in occupational settings. However, they are still not extensively tested in real-world scenarios, or for particle number concentrations. An industrial scenario characterized by high emissions of unintentionally-generated nanoparticles (NP) was selected to assess the performance of a one-box model. Worker exposure to NPs due to thermal spraying was monitored, and two methods were used to calculate emission rates: the convolution theorem, and the cyclic steady state equation. Monitored concentrations ranged between 4.2 × 104–2.5 × 105 cm−3. Estimated emission rates were comparable with both methods: 1.4 × 1011–1.2 × 1013 min−1 (convolution) and 1.3 × 1012–1.4 × 1013 min−1 (cyclic steady state). Modeled concentrations were 1.4-6 × 104 cm−3 (convolution) and 1.7–7.1 × 104 cm−3 (cyclic steady state). Results indicated a clear underestimation of measured particle concentrations, with ratios modeled/measured between 0.2–0.7. While both model parametrizations provided similar results on average, using convolution emission rates improved performance on a case-by-case basis. Thus, using cyclic steady state emission rates would be advisable for preliminary risk assessment, while for more precise results, the convolution theorem would be a better option. Results show that one-box models may be useful tools for preliminary risk assessment in occupational settings when room air is well mixed.</jats:p>