212 Chapter 9 Health and Toxic Substances contaminant can exist in the atmog cy the in whie ilar poison may Point to dan inating a part Jeteriot mists, gaseous mol ther, the medical data inc short-term exposure or may suggest 4 ger in us effects from long-term expos ay! Stree Mh \ Time-Weighted Averages The most popular measure of air-contaminant exposures is the time-weighg 7 (TWA) The PELs are understood £0 be TWAS unless OerWS® Specified Th, onal weigheed-average concentration over a S1HOUF SL, Such a gh, dgnizes that concentrations of alr contaminants change over time ang va, sometimes permissible for a workplac: concentration to exceed the permit, if at other times during the workday the EXPOSUre Is sufficiently lower thay the mitted value such that the average exposure for the workshill is lower thay 4, My ified level “He The following formula is used to compute the TWA: (44 where & = equivalent 8-hour time-weighted-average concentration = observed concentration of the contaminant in time Perigg i > = length of time period i 1 = number of time periods studied The calculation will now be illustrated in Case Study 9.3. CASE STUDY 9.3 Calculate the 8-hour, full shift TWA for the concentrations shown, | Time Observed Length period, concentration, of period, i i T, (hours) Gxt 1 2 y J 2 4 25 10 | 3 7 1 7 4 5 2 10 5 “3 1 3 Total 8 33 = Sch a Solution 33 E == = 4.125: mM The Case Study 9.3 cay leasures of Exposure 213 substance present in the ing problem Suppose, for ‘stance, th nitric acid Was barely below genta ther that the same atmosphi 'S quite adequate if there is only one toxic Phere. Howey, ¢ an industint ene" mixtures present a different the specified PEL Gopi TWA concentration of TE showed TWA oo me Pet cubic meter. Suppose fur- scribed limits of | mg per cubic me WA concentrations of just under the pre- acetic acid at the same tine Taye ("Sulfuric acid and 25 mg per cubic meter for violates the standard, but common ae nate! Mone of these three acid concentrations the same time are dangeroys "5 Says that the three concentrations present at ‘The synergistic effect o ompl bj ynerg ct Of combinati i Most research has concentrateq on directs fe of soars eae ae tures of contaminants Would tend to na, Ct effects of substances acting alone. Some mix- caustics mixed with acids may ‘o neutralize each other and be beneficial. For instance. ever. the three acids work Produce benign salts. In the example just described, how- mixtures the combined effa & together are bound to have a combined effect. For some OSHA takes a mad ct may be far worse than the sum of the individual effects. stances 10 be considered, bor rer oae® bY Fequiring simple combinations of toxic sub- ‘ethod is to sum the ratios oy eeneT@ly ignores the complex synergistic effects. The m Tatios of concentrations of each substance to its own PEL. The result- nity. The following formula summarizes the computation: “GG G En le? +o ant Ly’ “ where Em = calculated equivalent ratio for the entire mixture Cj = concentration of contaminant i L Permissible exposure level (PEL) for contaminant i n = number of contaminants present in the atmosphere E,, is not permitted to exceed 1. The calculation is demonstrated in Case Study 9.4. CASE STUDY 9.4 An industrial process produces exposure in accordance with the following table: Nitric acid Sulfuric acid Acetic acid Contaminant, 1 2 Concentration, C; 4 09 Limit, L; 1 Solution Since 2.58 > 1, the concentration of the mixture exceeds the PEL, even though the individual PELs are not exceeded.and Noise hapter 10 Environmental conto! ' Fexhaus ' Makeup ait 4 Velocity Muttiptied PY nultiplic velocily Must equal by | Square feet of opening | Squate Wet { ot opin | FIGURE 10.4 Wataneing mikeup ana eNtiaust alt and to maintain effectively 100 expen, piney nL Cia wennlt et le ae System, Besides the energy problem, another problem with supp! ying makeup air yp, 1 he outside. This is an unusual problem, but iy, presented itsel on ocasion, Aone plant the makeup air inlet was adjacent 1 ay freeway, whieh caused carbon monoxide and other automobile exhaust emissions ig, drawn into the building, In another poor design, the makeup air inlet was 50 clo y The exhaust system discharge that contaminants were being drawn back in and teciny Iaued around the plant, That way, if workers managed to escape Preathing the cong inated air the first time through, they got another chance to become exposed! \ quick check to determine whether there is a sufficient makeup air supply isy, check atmospheric pressure both inside and outside the plant. The pressure inside shou be only slightly lower than the pressure outside. If the pressure inside is substantia lower. then the makeup air supply is insufficient, The basic relationship between makeup and exhaust is illustrated in Figure 10.4. The cross-sectional area of makeup opening ‘multiplied by the velocity of flow through those openings must equal the cross-section area of the exhaust openings multiplied by the velocity of flow through the exhaust The provision for adequate makeup air and a sufficient volume of generd exhaust ventilation is sometimes the only practical solution to the problem of reducig air-contaminant exposures to specified levels. Case Study 10.1 will illustrate the prin: ple of this solution to the problem systems can be expensive, bath £0 inst presence of contaminated ait from tl / CASE STUDY 10.1 An industrial process liberates 2 cubic feet of chlorobenzene per hour into a room that measures 20 feet by 40 feet and has a ceiling height of 12 feet. What minimum general exhaust ventilation in cubic feet per minute is necessary to prevent age" eral health hazard in this room? Solution ‘A subtle facet of this problem is that for i es l : a continuously operating process dimensions of the room are really irrelevant to the solution, Iti true that for a short duration exposure, the size of the room will affect the dilution of the chloroben”=%Ventilation 237 pan he confines of the room. But wo deal with we Culfcient ventilation 10 yickd an a continuous process, one MUS PFO 2 enzer ample supply of mak to continuously Me uhe chlorobenzene to levels within hi fakeup air to conti y se eT Tor chown et His regu of one. todilute the chlorobensene-Then et sary the total ventilation neces 2 18 X ~ 1,000,000 2X 1,000,000 75 = 26,667 fU/hour 26,667 [t'hour 60 minutes/hour = 444 it'/minute, puiation Devices Inthe exhaust air is clean enough to meet external standards, no filtration or purifica: tion may be necessary once the air gets outside the plant. But often some type of purifis ation device is mecessary on the outside as is required indoors for recirculating systems. particularly for the removal of particulates. The paragraphs that follow describe some of the basic types of particulate removal devices, Centrifugal devices, often called cyclones (see Figure 10.5), take advantage of the mass of the contaminant particles, causing them to collect on the sides of the cyelone in Clean air outlet FIGURE 10.5 Cyclone and other dry-type centrifugal collectors for removal of particulates from exhaust air (source: ACGIH Committee on Low-pressure cyclone _Dry-type dynamic precipitator Industrial Ventilation).Noise sources _— peamaic inner (at 1) inca ate cra ch nol band eon machine ail machine ing shakeout area wood pI punch press Forging hammer Pheymatieair hoist: 4000 1b -qumbler 6 in. 3 in., small castings ‘Automatic serew machine Not blanking Boiler room Arc welder Milling machine (at 4 ft) Pneumatic drill Inside a car (50 mph) FIGURE 10.12 Decibel noise levels of fami Sound level (ub) us no 10s 100 9s Industrial Noise 245 ing effort required __—_ Nearly impossible tw communicate By 61S Very difficult 19 communicate by voice Shout with hands cupped between mouth nd another person's ear Shout at 17240 at Normal voice at 1/2 1, shout at 2 Normal voice at 1 ft, shout at 40 = 16 ft yrmal voice at 14 ft, shout Normal voice at 15 ft sh Normal voice at 2.1, shout at 8 ft iliar sounds (source: NIOSH). TABLE 10.1 Scale for Combining Decibels Difference bet levels to be added (dB) ‘ween two decibel "Amount to be added to larger level to obtain decibel sum (4B) 3.0 26 21 18. 14 12 10 os 06 05 o4 03 02 Source: NIOSH (Indust val Noise Control Manual (NIOSH 79-1 . EeCASE STUDY 10.2 oY Z Suppose that noise exposure ata workstation is essentially due to four SOUrce, tollows: Say Machine A 86 dB Machine B (identical to machine A) 86 dB Machine C 82dB 78 dB Machine D First, the two identical noise sources, Machines A and B, are combined to Produe noise level of 89 dB. Then Machine C is added as follows: fa dB difference = 89 dB — 82 dB = 7dB. From Table 10.1.4 difference of 7 dB between two sources results in the addition of 0.8 dB to the larger source. Therefore, the combined sound of machines A, B. and Cis combined sound (A, B, C) = 89 dB + 0.8 dB = 89.8 dB, Adding Machine D. we have dB difference = 89.8 dB — 78 dB = 11.8dB = 12 dB. Returning to Table 10.1, a difference of 12 dB between two sources results in the addition of 0.2 dB to the larger source. Therefore, the combined sound of all machines is combined sound (A, B, C, D) = 89.8 dB + 0.2 dB = 90.0 dB.Environ ~ 248 Chapter 10 pastor Nabe amu 2 UNS era A weighted Reerenee dapaae Ceghtol RE st sa Fevel time tt aunt vt " Wwe tay “ “ tu 076 xt aa 108 066 x nt Ww 0ST x isd 10 ie st 8 ut nes ss ae m2 038 * wt i 033 ‘ Wo a 0.29 . o us 0.25 ” . 116 02 ™ 70 7 0.19 a2 Us 0.16 e $3 9 o4 8 120 0.125 es 40 cs * 4 2 0.10 a xs 122 0.095 a 0.082 38 0.07 a 0.063 100 0054 101 0.047 102 0.041 103 0.036 0.031 Source: Code of Fe The range of permissible exposures in Table 10.2 makes possible a computation of a time-weighted-average exposure, relating each exposure time to the limit permit dure is very similar to the calculation used carler ted for that sound level. The proce when multiple contaminants are present in the atmosphere. The formula used is 1 C; _ D = 100 100{ 2 + 2 + i > é Z oy) where _D = total shift noise exposure (“dose”) as a percent of PEL C; = time of exposure at noise level i 7, = maximum permissible exposure time at noise level / (from Table 10.2) n= number of different noise levels observed he AL of 85 dBA! An interesting computation is for total shift exposure exactly at t using Equation (10.1), the computation is as follows: 4 C, 8 D=10>= = - UT, 1oo(*.) 50%.Fcreeee Hee Hee HEH eke stu beranarireerrereeeerere ee ae SEPREenaeeene as Noise-level readings show (hat a worker exposure to noise in a given plant is follows: 8:00 A.M.-10:00 A.M. 90 dBA 10:00 4.1.=11:00 a.m, 95 dBA 11:00 a.M.-12:30 pm. 75 dBA 12:30 P.M.=1:30 pM. 85 dBA 1:30 PM.-2:00 PM. 95 dBA 2:00 P.M.~4:00 PM. 90 dBA Adding up the noise durations for cach level, we obtain the following: At noise level 90 dBA 2+ 2 =4 hours At noise level 95 dBA 1+ 1/2=15 hours At noise level 75 dBA 1! hours (ignore) At noise level 85 dBA 1 hours Total 8 hours The reason that the 15-hour exposure at 75 dBA was ignored is that 75 dBA is below the range of Table 10.2. In other words, workers may be exposed to noise lev- els of 75 dBA for as long as desired with no adverse effects, at least as far as safety standards are concerned, Computing the ratios at each level and summing, in accordance with Equa- tion (10.1), yields uC, 4 bu ) D= WO = 100 5 + 2 4 + Samim ek = 100(0.5 + 0.375 + 0.0625) = 93.75%, Since 9, % is less than 100%, the PEL is greater than 50%, the AL of 85 dBA. (i not exceeded. However. hour TWA)J-CISLATIEE Perse CASE STUDY 10.4 a distance of 2 feet from the operator anq the operator. How much is to be gained by a t from the machine? How much reduction ea utd A worker's machine is located at duces a noise exposure of 95 dB to ing the operator to a position 4 fee be achieved by a move to 8 feet? Solution A move from 2 to 4 feet is a doubling of distance and results in a 6-dB reduction; sound level. The resultant level would be ton in 95 dB — 6dB = 89 dB eeIndustrial Noise 253 which would probably be within th ; e 8-h pea ttcion andotier sures he osereateen aan ‘eet significant. another 6 dB toa ras ‘ignoring ve foubling, resulting in a reduction of ane . reflections z ; would reduce noise exposures to less than the ier clan eae Sa WA. -hour .