Document Znkywnv58XLJ2JOgBV1O373aY

HSE Health & Safety Executive HSE CONTRACT RESEARCH REPORT No. 62/1994 DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING OF A PROCEDURE TO EVALUATE THE DUSTINESS OF POWDERS AND DUSTS IN INDUSTRIAL USE C P Lyons and D Mark Warren Spring Laboratory Gunnels Wood Road Stevenage Herts SGI 2BX HSE Health & Safety Executive HSE CONTRACT RESEARCH REPORT No. 62/1994 DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING OF A PROCEDURE TO EVALUATE THE DUSTINESS OF POWDERS AND DUSTS IN INDUSTRIAL USE C P Lyons and D Mark Warren Spring Laboratory Gunnels Wood Road Stevenage Herts SGI 2BX This report concerns the development and testing of a practical new method for determining the propensity of a material to produce airborne dust when handled (known as dustiness). The new method enables the dustiness of a material to be determined for three health-related fractions of airborne dust - the inhalable fraction, the thoracic fraction and the respirable fraction. This is achieved using a system based on the original Warren Spring Laboratory rolling drum dustiness tester, modified to maximise the dust dispersed and incorporating a new three-stage dust sampling system. The sampling system consists of two particle size selective stages in series, followed by a back-up filter. The size selectors are cylindrical plugs of porous polyurethane foam, chosen to select the thoracic and respirable dust fractions, and the inhalable fraction is obtained by empirical choice of the conical passage between the end of the drum and the first foam size selector. The performance of the size selective foams was calibrated using two different aerosols - sodium fluoroscein and fused alumina (aloxite), and good agreement with the requirements of the ISO/CEN sampling conventions was found. Determination of the dustiness values is by weighing the foams and filter before and after the test. However, due to instabilities in the weights of the foams, an identical set are positioned at the inlet to the drum to serve as controls. The performance and practicalities of the prototype design were evaluated by determining the dustiness of 23 different materials supplied from a range of industries. These tests demonstrated that the new device is capable of providing meaningful, reproducible results for materials of a wide range of dustiness values (5 orders of magnitude), A complete set of engineering drawings for the new tester is supplied in the report, as is a draft MDHS describing the method. This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive. Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy. Crown copyright 1994 Applications for reproduction should be made to HMSO First published 1994 ISBN 0 7176 0727 5 CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Review of WSL Rotating Drum Method 1.2.1 Description 1.2.2 Critical appraisal 1.3 Health-related Sampling Conventions 2. AIMS OF THE PROJECT 3 DESIGN STRATEGY 4 PRELIMINARY WORK , 4.1 Choice of Size Selective Sampling System 4.1.1 Introduction 4.1.2 Porous polyurethane foams 4.2 Improvements in Dust Dispersion 4.2.1 Introduction 4.2.2 The flowrate through the drum 4.2.3 The dust dispersion time 4.2.4 The mass of test material 4.3 Recommendations from the Preliminary Tests 4.3.1 The sampling system 4.3.2 The dust dispersion system 4.3.3 The design of the new foam stages 5 THE NEW PROTOTYPE TEST RIG 5.1 Description 5.2 Weight Stability of the Foams 5.3 Optimisation of Dust Dispersion 5.4 Calibration of the Sampling System 5.4.1 Introduction 5.4.2 Calibration with sodium fluorescein 5.4.3 Calibration with Aioxite 5.4.4 Agreement with ISO/CEN samplingconventions 6 LABORATORY TESTS WITH THE NEWPROTOTYPE METHOD 6.1 Method 6.2 Results 7 DESIGN OF PRODUCTION VERSION 7.1 Introduction 7.2 The New Design 7.2.1 The dust dispersion system 7.2.2 The sampling system 7.2.3 Other design improvements 8 DISCUSSION 9 DRAFT MDHS 10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 11 REFERENCES TABLES FIGURES APPENDIX A: Foam mass stability data APPENDIX B: Blank tests with small foam disks APPENDIX C: Blank tests with large foam disks APPENDIX D: Analysis of variance data from the optimisation experiments APPENDIX E: Results of tests with the new prototype tester using range of industrial materials APPENDIX F: Final detailed design drawings for the production version of the new dustiness tester Contents 6 which is also used to ensure that this flowrate is maintained during the test. This measurement is supplemented by a dry gas meter which is used to obtain an accurate measure of the actual volume of air sampled in the test. All the size separating stages are weighed before assembly and 100 g of sample material is then spread evenly over the bottom of the drum. An automatic timing system controls the operation of the system. A simple push button starts the drum rotating, and after 5 s the pump starts and dust laden air is drawn through to the sampler for a period of 1 minute, after which the system automatically switches off. At the end of the test, the sampler is dismantled, the size selecting stages are weighed and the amounts of dust greater and less than 9 fjm are calculated. The drum and size selecting stages are then cleaned and prepared for the next sample. Three repeat measurements are usually made on a material to give an idea of the consistency of the result. Three measures of dustiness are obtained; fine (particles <9 j/m), coarse (particles > 9 fim), and all particles sampled. 1.2.2 Critical appraisal The WSL dustiness tester was developed during the early 1980's during a large programme to investigate all aspects of dust production from materials handling processes. At that time they were not specifically interested in using the dustiness measurements for assessing the risk to worker health from materials handling processes, and so the sampling/particle collection system employed was not required to give to health-related dustiness values. For this application therefore, the current sampling system is unsuitable. The main feature of the device is its large (300 mm diameter x 460 mm long) rotating drum. This means that a wide variety of materials can be tested, including pellets, lumps of material, damp materials, as well as powders. In addition, the tumbling action involved in this test is thought to be representative of many material handling processes, including the action of mixers, conveyors and similar machines. It is especially relevant for processes where dust is thought to be produced by particle attrition and the breakup of aggregated particles. For these two reasons it is the most versatile of the dustiness testers currently available, and has been used on a great many materials giving a large body of data for reference (Higman et al 1984). Despite these advantages the current design has a number of operational problems that need resolving before it can be recommended for widespread use. These are: 1) Cleaning the drum can be a laborious and time-consuming task. Some materials can adhere quite strongly to the wails of the drum and require a major effort to remove them. 2) Particles deposit on the walls of the pipe that carries the dust laden air from the drum to the sampler. Although these are added to the dust collected in the pre separator, the losses have not been characterised with respect to particle*size and errors from subsequent misclassification of fine particles may be large but are in any case unknown. 3) A more critical source of error comes when very dusty materials are tested. The impaction plate can become completely coated with particles and further particles may bounce from the surface to be collected on the filter. This can happen despite Contents 8 2 AIMS OF THE PROJECT The aims of the proposed work are to:1) establish a quantitative test to assess the relative dustiness of materials in powder, granular or related forms; 2) determine the most relevant and appropriate techniques for measurement of dustiness for both nuisance and health-related size fractions; 3) design a test apparatus which incorporates the above requirements, whilst minimising the construction costs; 4) test the apparatus with a number of dusts and products to be specified by the HSE; 5) verify the performance of the apparatus in terms of the validity and reproducibility of the results, and the practical 'usability' (e.g. ease of use, portability, etc.) of the apparatus; and 6) produce a draft document for inclusion in the 'Methods for the Determination of Hazardous Substances' (MDHS) series on the proven method. Contents 4.1.2 Porous polyurethane foams The particle size selecting performance of porous polyurethane foams has been reported by a number of workers (Roessler (1966), Brown (1980), Gibson and Vincent (1981)). A semi-empirical theoretical treatment has recently been reported by Vincent et al, 1993, in which they attempt to piece together the various experimental work to produce a predictive model. From all these studies it became evident that the predominant modes of particle collection are inertial and gravitational deposition. This combination of inertial and gravitational forces is similar to the particle capture mechanisms that occur in the human respiratory system, and therefore by careful choice of parameters should lead to suitable size selecting stages. The structure of the foams is characterised by the following parameters: - nominal porosity (in pores per inch, ppi): - volume (packing) fraction, o; - the effective filament thickness, df; - the thickness of the foam in the direction of airflow, t. The particle penetration (P) was shown by Gibson and Vincent (1982) to be governed by the following parameters; P = f(St, Ng, df,t) where St is the Stokes number defining the inertial behaviour of the particle in the foam, and Ng defines the effect of gravitational forces. The use of porous foams as particle size selectors for health-related aerosol fractions is not new. They are used in the French CIP10 personal sampler to both select and collect the alveolar fraction (Courbon et al, 1983). They have also been used in a sampler for the thoracic fraction for the ambient atmosphere (Mark et al, 1990), and in a personal sampler for both thoracic and respirable fractions (Mark et al, 1988). The development of the personal sampler is currently continuing under the auspices of the Nickel Environmental Producers Research Association (NiPERAMAitken et al, 1993). It was shown in the early work (Mark et al, 1988) that if aerosol is drawn through a 25 mm thick plug of foam of porosity 30 ppi with a velocity of 4 cm s'1, particles comprising the thoracic fraction will penetrate. Subsequent unpublished work (Mark, 1989) showed that the respirable fraction will penetrate a plug of the same thickness of 90 ppi foam if aerosol is drawn through at the same velocity. To maintain the same size selection characteristics at higher flowrate it is simply necessary to increase the cross sectional area of the foam plug. In the NiPERAfunded project one of the main question marks concerning the use of foams was addressed - that of the consistency and quality control of the foam itself. For other size-selective devices such as impactors, cyclones and elutriators it is possible to ensure reproducibility of size selection from one specimen to the next by specifying adequate tolerances for manufacture. For foams, despite the manufacturers' assurances of adequate quality control, wide acceptance for the technique has been prevented by worries about reproducibility. This question was resolved by the extensive work reported by Aitken et al (1993). They showed that for both 30 and 90 ppi foams, particle penetration was unaffected by choosing plugs either from the same sheet or from sheets manufactured at different times with different batch numbers. Contents 13 two hours conditioning in the weighing room atmosphere had passed. At this time the differences in weights between the test and control foams had returned to within 0.5 g of what they were before the test foams were exposed. 4.2 improvements in Dust Dispersion 4.2.1 Introduction From the weight stability problems of the foams, reported above, it became clear that the amount of dust dispersed in the rolling drum had to be increased for an accurate and sensitive method. A series of tests were carried out therefore to investigate the parameters that affected the amount of dust dispersed. Batches of near-monodisperse powders of fused alumina were used. This material, marketed under the name of Aloxite, has been used widely (Mark et al, 1985) in tests on the performance of aerosol samplers, and is readily available in large quantities and in a range of graded sizes from 9 to 120 fjm aerodynamic diameter. Three main operating parameters were investigated. They were: 1) the flowrate through the drum; 2) the dust dispersion time; and 3) the mass of test material. A preliminary investigation of the dustiness of a range of grades of Aloxite showed that F360 gave the largest dust yield. With this material it was hoped that small effects due to changes in the parameters mentioned above would show up more clearly and nearly all of the subsequent measurements described below, were made with this grade. In order to minimise possible errors due to batch to batch variation in the mean particle size of the Aloxite, all test samples were taken from a single batch. At the outset it was not clear how the dust output from the drum varied with the parameters above. If the dust yield varied linearly with these quantities then the test parameters could be changed to suit unusual materials. For instance, if a material gave out a small quantity of dust then either the sampling time or the sample mass could be increased to give a dust yield that could be measured more accurately. Correction could then be made after the test confident that the effect of the changes has been to increase the yield linearly. Conversely, if the sampling stage became overloaded by a very dusty material either the sampling mass or the time could be reduced and correction made afterwards. This procedure is used for materials that overload the Heubach dustiness tester. If, however, the dust yield did not vary linearly then the parameters would have to be fixed. The values would be chosen to give the widest range of accurately measurable dust yields without overloading the sampling foams or filter. In any case, the flowrate, once set will have to remain constant as the calibration for any size selecting stages will only be valid for that flowrate. . 4.2.2 The flowrate through the drum Flowrates of 20, 28.3, 35 and 40 I min'1 were drawn in turn through the old WSL dustiness tester, with 100 g of Aloxite F360 used as the test material in each test. The results, which are given in Figure 4, show that the dust yield increases linearly with Contents 15 of dust dispersed for subsequent collection in the sampling system we can increase the mass of material tested. 4.3 Recommendations from the Preliminary Tests 4.3.1 The Sampling System 1) The work described above showed that the most suitable method of particle size selection for giving both the thoracic and respirable fractions of the dust dispersed in a new design of dustiness tester is porous polyurethane foams. 2) However, due to the variability of the foam weights with environmental conditions, foams can only be used if at least 5 mg of dust is collected on each of the foam stages. . 3) This conclusion provides the necessary specifications for the improvements in the quantity of dust dispersed in the dust dispersion section of the test apparatus. 4) The sensitivity of the foams to small changes in the environment meant that some care had to be taken with the handling and storage of the foams. 4.3.2 The Dust Dispersion System From the work described above the following operating parameters were recommended in order to maximise the mass of dust dispersed: 1) As the dust yield was linearly proportional to the flowrate, a compromise value of 40 I min1 was chosen . 2) The dust dispersion time was kept at 1 min, this seeming to be a fair compromise for the range of different materials likely to be tested in the new dustiness tester. 3) The mass of test material was fixed at 200 g, this again being a compromise for the range of materials likely to be tested in the new dustiness tester. 4.3.3 The Design of the New Foam Stages With a recommended flowrate of 40 I min'1, a circular open area of about 130 mm would be required to give the 4 cms'1 velocity through the foam necessary for selecting the thoracic and respirable fractions using 25 mm thick plugs of 30 and 90 ppi foams respectively. Contents 16 5 THE PROTOTYPE TEST RIG 5.1 Description The new prototype test rig (shown in Figure 8) was designed to enable us to carry out the necessary optimisation and calibration procedures prior to the design of a production version. Consequently, it was designed to be a versatile system, easy to dismantle so that changes could be made to some of the essential details, such as the distance between the foams and the end of the drum. It also enabled us to provide the exact face velocity through the foams (for correct particle size selection), by using thin annular disks with different internal diameters to change the open area of foam and the sampling flowrate. The prototype device consists of the roiling drum from the original WSL tester fitted with a new sampling system. The pumping and control system are also from the original WSL tester. The prototype sampling system comprises a new end cone, a spacer piece to vary the distance between the first foam and the cone, two foam holders, and a filter holder. The new end cone bolts onto the end of the drum and the other components slide in series onto three long threaded rods, fastened to the end of the cone. Gaskets between each stage provide adequate sealing when the three nuts are tightened on the rods. A teflon shaft seal was used to connect the sampling system to the pump and the flow control. In this prototype version, the sampling system rotates with the drum. Each foam measures 1 50 mm diameter by 25 mm thick and is held in an solid aluminium frame. The open area of the foam plug (nominally 130 mm) is defined by the thin annular aluminium disks on either side of the foam plug shown in Figure 8. A number of disks, of different internal diameters, were made so that the face velocity through the foam could be changed, to optimise the agreement of the particle penetration performance of the foams with the ISO/CEN sampling conventions. Assembly is as follows: the spacer is first fitted against the cone of the drum on the threaded rods, then the frame containing the 30 ppi foam is put into place followed by the 90 ppi foam frame. Finally, the filter holder is located on the rods behind the 90 ppi foam , and the nuts tightened on the rods to compress the gaskets between each stage so that the system is leak-proof. The pump and flow control are then connected to the back of the sampling system via the rotating seal. After a dustiness test has been completed, the sampling system is dismantled and the foam frames laid down horizontally on the bench for removal of the aluminium disk. The foam plug is then carefully lifted out of the frame with tweezers and prepared for what ever conditioning or analysis procedure is required. 5.2 Weight Stability of the Foams As the diameters of the foam plugs specified for the new prototype were increased from 50 mm to 150 mm, it was considered essential to assess the effects on the weight stability of the larger foams. Tests similar to those described in section 4.1.2 were carried out to determine the effects of drawing air through the foams and the variable ambient conditions. The results are shown in Figure 9 and are given in detail in Appendix C. As expected, larger foams show greater variations in weight when stressed and take longer to recover than the smaller foams. The amount of dust that must be collected on each Contents 17 foam is therefore greater and was calculated to be 6 mg for the error to be the same as that permitted in the paper by Vaughan et al (1989). In addition, the recovery time before results can be obtained with the larger foams was increased to 4 hrs. 5.3 Optimisation of Dust Dispersion In order to finalise on the choice of parameters required to maximise the dust dispersion from the drum, a comprehensive set of tests were carried out with the new prototype tester. The parameters that were considered to have a possible effect on the concentration of dust reaching the first measurement stage of the sampling system (the 30 ppi foam plug) are described below. 1) Drum length. From observations of the distribution of dust within the drum, it became clear that most of the dust that reached the sampling section was generated in just the downwind half of the drum. It was thought therefore, that if the length of the drum was halved, more of the airborne dust generated would be collected on the foams. Tests were proposed with the standard 460 mm length and 250 mm length drums. 2} Distance between the drum and the first foam. The spacer piece was introduced into the prototype because we were concerned about large lumps of material impacting on the surface of the first foam. Tests were proposed with, and without, the 10 cm long spacer piece. 3) Mass of test material. Results from the preliminary study have shown that increasing the mass of test material does increase the mass of dust dispersed. However this can introduce problems for valuable materials, and those that are harmful to health. Consequently the choice of the mass of test material must be a compromise. Tests were therefore proposed therefore to investigate the minimum mass of material that would give reliable results. Masses of 100 and 200 g were investigated. 4) Type of material, in order to gain maximum benefit from the tests, two of the least dusty materials available were used as the test materials. The rationale for this choice was that if we could accurately measure the health-related dustiness of those materials, then the dustiness of other, more dusty materials, could be measured accurately. Aloxite FI 200 grade and granular fertiliser (Growmore) were chosen, these having been shown earlier, and by Higman et al (1984), to have very low dustiness values. The experimental design, in the form of a randomised block, is shown in Table 3. Each entry represents a three repeat measurements of dustiness. Therefore the data set represents a balanced block design. The open area of the foams in the sampling system was set at 130 mm and was not changed during these tests. Foam weights were measured using a system of five control foams for each foam type. These were weighed with the test foams before each test. After the test was carried out the foams were left overnight in the balance room to condition before weighing in the morning. Changes in the weights of the control foams were used to correct for the variation in the test foams due to changes in ambient conditions. The weight of dust Contents 18 collected on the foam , Wd was therefore calculated from: wd-wrwc where Wt is the change in weight of the test foam, and Wc is the mean change in weight of the control foams. The length of the drum was adjusted by using a sliding conical insert which sealed against the inside walls of the drum, see Figure 8a. This enabled the same drum to be used throughout the tests, thereby avoiding problems of differences in the internal geometry of the drum, including the blades. All the samples used in these tests were riffled into 100 and 200 g lots from the original bulk material to ensure representative samples. These samples were stored in a drying cabinet at 60C to ensure consistency of moisture content between replicates of the same material. The results of all these tests are summarised in Tables 1 and given in detail in Appendix D. They show, as expected that, increasing the sample mass and reducing the drum length increases the amount of dust collected on the foams. The tests also showed that the two materials differed significantly in their dustiness values. This was not revealed whervthe same materials were tested in the old dustiness tester. Surprisingly, the presence of the spacing piece between the drum and the 30 ppi foam had no significant effect on the dust collected by either of the foams or the filter. The 30.ppi foam is the most likely to have been affected as it was considered possible that extraneous lumps of material could be thrown on to the foam. However, the variability on the measurements with the 30 ppi foam, are larger than those with either the 90 ppi foam or the filter, so that any small effect may have been masked. This variability could arise from agglomerated particles hitting the surface of the foam, and then either breaking up to penetrate, or being collected by the foam. This could appreciably increase the variance in the data for the 30 ppi foam. The most encouraging conclusion to come out of this series of tests was that the dust masses collected on both of the foams was significantly above the measurement limit of 6 mg, set by the stability of the foam weight, for all but one of the test conditions. In addition, it is worth repeating at this stage that, the new prototype tester appeared to be more sensitive than the old WSL tester, because the differences in the values of dustiness for the two materials tested were significant in this series of tests, whilst they were not significant with the old tester. Finally, from the results of these tests, it appeared that a four-figure balance could be used to measure the foam weights with the necessary precision, thereby reducing the overall cost of the method. All these factors gave us confidence to proceed further with the development, and on to calibration. 5.4 Calibration of Sampling System 5.4.1 Introduction With most of the parameters of the test method assigned fixed values, from the tests described above, a complete calibration of the sampling system was the next step. Contents 19 We decided at the outset to consider the sampling system (two foam size selectors and filter) as a unit that could be separated from the dust dispersion system (drum and means of rotation). This meant that we had to decide, for the purposes of the calibration of the size selective stages, where the dispersion finished and the sampling began, and then which particles constituted the health-related fractions. For this purpose, we defined a "sampling plane", which is shown in Figure 8b. This plane at the entry to the inlet cone, defines those particles that are available for sampling. The mass of particles penetrating this plane is defined as the true total 100% reference, and is determined by adding the mass of particles deposited on the inlet cone to those collected on the other sampling stages. A second sampling plane can be set at the surface of the 30 ppi foam, and it is only particles that reach this plane that will be included in the routine dustiness test. Other planes at the surfaces of the 90 ppi foam and the filter respectively can also be defined. In practice therefore, the following parameters can be measured. The total weight of dust entering the sampler, WT is given by: ^r-^c+^30+^90+^ where Wc is the weight of dust deposited on the cone, W30 is the weight of dust collected on the 30 ppi foam, ..... .... VV90 is the weight of dust collected on the 90 ppi foam, and Wf is the weight of dust collected on the filter. The particle penetrations, P& P30, and Pao through the three stages of the sampler are then given by: ^30* ^90* pc-- Sv ^30" WT fV ^90" wT where Pc is the particle penetration of the inlet cone to reach the surface of the 30 ppi foam, P30 is the particle penetration of the 30 ppi foam to reach the surface of the 90 ppi foam, ^90 is the particle penetration of the 90 ppi foam to reach the surface of the filter. The first task with the calibration procedure was to ensure, in a preliminary set of tests, that at the flowrate chosen from the work described above, the particle penetrations of the two foam size selective stages were in good agreement with the ISO/CEN thoracic and respirable conventions. This was carried out using two test particles of aerodynamic diameters of 5 and 10 pm -close to the d50's of the respirable and thoracic conventions respectively. Once this was confirmed, the calibration curves were completed using about eight other test aerosols of different sizes. Each penetration curve was then compared with the respective health related size fraction. The penetrations through the cone and the Contents 20 30 and 90 ppi foams were compared with, respectively, the inhalable, thoracic and respirable size fractions. Two types of aerosol were used for the calibration to highlight any effects due to particle bounce from the wide range of material types that may be used in the test method. Sodium fluorescein aerosol was used as the main aerosol for the calibration. The particles consisted of monodisperse spheres which are soft and have a tendency to stick to any surfaces they come in contact with, whilst fused alumina (Aloxite} on the other hand is made up of irregularly shaped particles which are hard and will probably bounce off any hard surfaces they come in contact with. 5.4.2 Calibration with Sodium Fluorescein Calibration using monodisperse aerosols of sodium fluorescein was carried out using the experimental layout shown in Figure 10. The test aerosol was generated using a spinning top aerosol generator with the particle size being controlled by a combination of the speed of the disc and the concentration of the sodium fluorescein in a solution of water and ethanol. Measurements of the aerodynamic diameters of the particles were made using microthreads and optical microscopy for particles greater than 5 //m (May and Druett 1968, Barrett et al, 1988) and a Palas sedimentation ceil for smaller particles. In all of the tests reported here the geometric standard deviation og was always less than 1.1. Unfortunately due to excessive losses of the larger particles within the aerosol generating system, the maximum size of sodium fluorescein particles tested was 25 fjrr\. The Aloxite particles provided information on the penetration of the larger sizes. After generation particles were blown past the inlet to the dustiness apparatus which drew in aerosol laden air at a rate of 38 Ipm through the drum and the prototype sampling system. The preliminary work with 5 and 10 fjm particles showed this flowrate gave closest agreement to the curves. As described above, the foam size selectors were held in rings of internal diameters of 130 mm, which defined the open area of foam exposed to the aerosol. In the prototype version, for convenience, a 70 mm diameter filter was used. The dustiness apparatus was rotated at 30 rpm as it would in an ordinary test. Tests lasted for about 1 to 10 mins depending on the particle size. To remove possible biases the order in which each particle size was used for the calibration measurement was randomised. After the test, the dustiness apparatus was carefully dismantled and each of the foams washed thoroughly in 500 ml of deionised water. The walls of the cone were washed down with 250 ml of deionised water. In addition, the filter and the walls between the 90 ppi foam and the filter were washed with 100 ml of deionised water. All of the deionised water was buffered to pH 7, and 3.5 ml samples were taken from the wash volumes for fluorometric analysis. A Perkin Elmer 1000M model fluorometer was used for all of these analyses. The results of this work are shown in Figure 11 along with the ISO/CEN definitions of the health related size fractions for inhalable,. thoracic and respirable dusts. Close agreement can be seen between the experimental points and the sampling conventions for both the thoracic and respirable fractions. Although the data seem to give an underestimate of the thoracic fraction the error is small. Later experiments in which the open area of the foam was increased (and therefore the face velocity of the air was reduced) did not affect the fit greatly. The only practical changes that could be made to the thickness had too great an effect and resulted in considerable departures from the curves. The most surprising Contents 26 7 DESIGN OF PRODUCTION VERSION 7.1 Introduction The prototype tester, described above, served its purpose well in allowing us to optimise the design of the system and its operating parameters. However, it was intended to be a "breadboard" version upon which changes could be easily made - it was not designed for manufacture and general use. The prototype tester was put together mainly from components of the old WSL tester, but with a modified drum and sampling system. A new design was therefore required that would be suitable for manufacture and subsequent general use. The following areas were identified for improvement in the new design. 1) The foams and filters must be held in robust carrying frames that both define the open areas exposed to the dust and ensure ease of handling during weighing and dismantling. It was considered to be essential that the exposed surfaces of the foams and filters should not be touched. 2) The sampling system must be quickly and easily removed from the drum, and must be designed to enable either both, one or no foams are used for particle selection in front of the filter. 3) The rotating parts of the apparatus must be housed inside a protective guard to prevent accidents from entrapment in the rollers/gears etc. 4) The components of the apparatus must be designed so as to minimise the utilisation of laboratory bench space. As the expert skills for product design and engineering were not available in-house, the services of Mr John Fish from J S Holdings of Stevenage were employed to provide the new design together with a complete set of engineering drawings, which are presented in Appendix F. 7.2 The New Design The general arrangement of the design of the production version of the new dustiness tester is given in Figure 20. It shows the various components of the apparatus built into a self-contained unit, with the rotating drum and sampling system at bench top level, and the pump and flow control system situated below. The improvements to the design of the individual components of the apparatus are described below. 7.2.1 The dust dispersion system As recommended from the results of the investigations described above, the drum is half the length of that of the old WSL tester. The additional improvements suggested are as follows. * The drum is now to be constructed by first welding the lifting vanes in place on a flat sheet of stainless steel, then rolling it to form a 30 cm diameter cylinder and welding the join. Two identical cones are then welded to either end, so as to Contents 27 minimise the number of flanged joints. The welding of the lifting vanes to a flat surface produces a smooth joint, thereby reducing the problems of cleaning. * The method of rotating the drum, a system of two rollers forming a drive bed, is to be retained. This has advantages over other methods in that it allows the drum to be easily removed for cleaning and is not subject problems associated extraneous dust particles. 7.2.2 The sampling system * The foam carriers (shown in Figure 21} are to be made from rolled aluminium channel, joined to form a ring, so that the edges of the foam are totally enclosed. This prevents air leakages, and also helps to minimise contact with the foam surface. * The filter is to be of diameter 142 mm this being a standard stock size for most manufacturers. It is to be held in a filter carrier comprising two interlocking stainless steel rings between which the filter is sandwiched. Again this has the benefit of minimising contact with the filter surface itself. * The foams and filters are fitted into a protective housing designed to enable two, one, or no foams stages to be installed between the cone and the filter, dependent upon the dust fraction required and the level of dustiness expected. * An identical sampling system is fitted to the inlet of the drum, carrying the control foams and filter, and protected from extraneous dust by the use of filters on either side. The inlet therefore comprises the following components; protection filter 1,30 ppi and 90ppi control foams, control filter, protection filter 2. 7.2.3 Other design improvements * The timing and flow control systems are to be essentially the same as that used in the old WSL tester. However, they have been modernised using an up-to-date timer and a simpler, easier to use flow control system. * The apparatus is to be built around a main chassis which is covered steel panels. Access to the rotating drum and sampling systems is via a safety lid which automatically switches off the electrical power when opened. Contents 28 8 DISCUSSION The aim of this project was to develop a practical dustiness test method, that gave dustiness values that are based on health-related definitions of airborne dust. The development was funded by the Health and Safety Executive, with the intention that the new method should be recommended by HSE in their "Methods for the Determination of Hazardous Substances" series. The original WSL rolling drum tester was chosen to form the basis of the development due to its versatility, in terms of range of materials capable of being tested and the handling operations simulated. In addition, as the sampling system is separated from the dust dispersion drum, the installation of a new sampling system was relatively simple. Several other workers had suggested improvements to the design {O'Farrell and Vaughan, 1986, and Janhunan et al, 1988), and these were taken into account in our development. The special feature of this development is the use of porous polyurethane foam plugs as the particle size selectors for the thoracic and respirable dust fractions in a specially designed sampling system that rotates with the drum. By careful choice of the porosity and dimensions of the foams, and the flowrate, we were able to produce size selective stages whose performance agreed closely with the requirements of the CEN/ISO sampling conventions for the thoracic and respirable fractions. The main drawback with the use of foam as particle size selectors was found to be the instability of their weight, and much time and effort was expended to develop a suitable weighing procedure, including the use of controls. Due to the weight problems with foam plugs, the dust dispersion system was modified in order to maximise the weight of dust collected. A bread-board prototype tester was used to determine the dustiness values of a 23 different, materials from a range of industries. The results demonstrated that the new device operated satisfactorily, being able to discriminate between two materials whose dustiness values showed no difference when using the old WSL method. These materials were chosen to cover the range of materials used in various industries. Some would give off very little dust when handled but give an indication of the resolution of the test method and its versatility. This work has also shown that when increased resolution is required for low dustiness materials then one or both of the foams can be removed leaving the filter to give precise measures of the thoracic or inhalable fractions. Despite providing for the first time, dustiness values in health-related dust fractions, it must be remembered that any connection between the measurements made in these tests and those made to estimate a worker's exposure to handling a dusty material can only be tentative at this stage. Much more work needs to be done to relate dustiness values to the emissions from processes and then to workers' exposures. Only when this is done will the full benefit from these measurements, in terms of either assessing the risk from the handling of a particular material or designing a suitable control strategy, be realised. Contents Table 1. Summary of the Analysis of variance Source of variance Total dust Significant at the 5% level Dust on the 30 ppi foam Dust on the 30 ppi foam Material Spacer No No Yes No No No Length Yes No Yes Mass Yes No Yes Dust on the filter Yes No Yes Yes Contents Contents FIGURE 2. - The ISO/CEN Particle Size Conventions for Respirable, Thoracic and Inhalable Dust. Dust yield (g) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Flowrate (Ipm) FIGURE 4. - Dust Yield Against Flowrate for Samples of Aloxite F360 Grade Contents <4-0 o 4o-' cc |.a <D <u r?2 O in (6) pjajA jshq I I Contents 05 FIGURE 5. - Variation in the Dust Yield With Sampling Time for a Sample Mass of 100 (Aloxite F360) *o-> CO a = (0 - *2 <0 -- Q3 fl) h- Q. O U- i i (6) p|8jA xsriQ Contents FIGURE 7. * Effect of Different Sampling Times for a Sample Mass of 200 g (Aloxite F360) plane Figure 8. Schematic diagrams of the prototype test rig: (a) shows the whole apparatus with the false wall used in the first series of tests indicated with the broken line; (b) gives a cross-section through the apparatus for holding the foams. Contents LD CM O CM U) in <D o LD CM c o OO CM ID o in o w l. 3 O -C cn .c *E o 5 Contents FIGURE 9. - Change In Weight Difference Between the Control (Wc) and Test (WJ Foams With Time FIGURE 10. - Experimental Set-Up Used for the Calibration of the Foams With Fluorescein Contents uotiendudd in CM o CM in in O Contents FIGURE 11. - Results of the Calibration Measurements Made with Fluorescein Contents Figure 14. Micrographs o f sections through the foams used in an Aloxite calibration measurement w ith FI 0 0 0 grade: (a) 90ppi foam; (b) Close to the windward edge of the 30 ppi foam ; (c) The 30 ppi foam 15 mm behind (b). All micrographs are lOOOx magnification. 0ow) qI Contents FIGURE 15. - Schematic Diagram of the Test Apparatus Used in the Test on the Materials Supplied by HSE M ass o f dust collected (m g) Animal Feeds (various) Ammoniun Garden Calcined Silica Talc Plaster Flowers Fine Coarse Mass o f dust collected (m g) Calcium Graphite Sterate Coarse Fine Carbon Black Batch 1 Batch 2 Nepheiline Syenite Goonyean Ground Sample 1 Sample 2 Interpon Bone Flint White Powder FIGURE 19. - Mass of Dust Collected on the 90 ppl Foam for Each Material Contents lb) Drum Outlet assembly FIGURE 20. - Final Design: (a) shows the test apparatus with its cover for use; (b) shows the apparatus with the cover and side panel removed Contents O-ring FIGURE 21, - Section Through the Outlet Foam Carrier Assembly. A Similar System is Used on the Inlet Contents Appendix A FOAM MASS STABILITY DATA Contents Test 1 Foam No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Small 30 ppi foam 2.43860 2.43908 2.43914 2.43904 2.43903 2.43887 2.43912 2.43911 2.43897 2.43900 Small 90 ppi foam 3.20936 3.20982 3.20982 3.20960 3.20943 3.20965 3.20978 3.20962 3.20956 3.20980 Large 30 ppi foam 15.89805 15.89750 15.89994 15.89928 15.89697 15.89718 15.89796 15.89832 15.89842 15.89824 Test 2 Large 90 ppi foam 17.96271 17.96001 17.95846 17.95881 17.95936 17.95999 17.96043 17.95982 1 7.95954 17.95872 5 g test weight 5.00043 5.00037 5.00041 5.00054 5.00038 5.00040 5.00044 5.00044 5.00045 5.00047 10 g test weight 10.00091 10.00078 10.00088 10.00082 10.00087 10.00089 10.00085 10.00088 10.00084 10.00094 Foam No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Small 30 ppi fqam 2.43922 2.43926 2.43958 2.43949 2.43943 2.43959 2.43969 2.43932 2.43938 2.43857 Small 90 ppi foam 3.21024 3.21046 3.21067 3.21022 3.21005 3.21047 3.21023 3.20986 3.21012 3.20989 Large 30 ppi foam 15.8999 15.89762 15.89718 15.89658 15.8965 15.89546 15.89534 15.89546 15.89594 15.89619 Large 90 ppi foam 17.96103 17.96178 17.96268 17.96248 17.96239 17.96165 17.96196 17.96239 17.96303 17.96368 5 g test weight 5.00039 5.00042 5.00038 5.00039 5.00039 5.00045 5.00035 5.00045 5.00045 5.00046 10 g test' weight 10.00087 10.00082 10.00080 10.00083 10.00085 10.00086 10.00083 10.00095 10.00086 10.00085 Contents Test 3 Foam No. 1 2 Small 30 ppi foam 2.43940 2.43924 3 2.43925 4 2.43942 5 2.43947 6 2.43924 7 2.43946 8 2.43964 9 2.43937 10 2.43936 Small 90 ppi foam 3.21061 3.21025 3.21034 3.21068 3.21050 3.21028 3.21052 3.21028 3.21058 3.21045 Large 30 ppi foam 15.92841 15.92926 15.93083 15.93289 15.93354 15.93271 15.9325 15.93378 15.93492 15.93467 Large 90 ppi foam 18.00761 18.00636 18.00646 18.00666 18.00633 18.0052 18.00606 18.00673 18.00737 18.00689 5 g test weight 5.00044 5.00041 5.00045 5.00044 5.00042 5.00041 5.00045 5.00043 5.00043 5.00044 10 g test weight 10.00084 10.00085 10.00087 10.00093 10.00086 10.00087 10.00087 10.00091 10.00083 10.00084 Contents Appendix B BLANK TESTS WITH SMALL FOAM DISKS Contents Test 1: 30 ppi foams. Test foams Foam No. 1 2 3 4 5. 6 7 8 9 10 (1) Initial Weight (9) 2.8349 2.7566 2.9143 2.9448 2.6387 2.9449 3.1478 2.4847 2.8973 2.7237 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.8318 2.7534 2.9104 2.9410 2.6347 2.9391 3.1413 2.4792 2.8907 2.7179 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.8359 2.7572 2.9147 2.9454 2.6388 2.9448 3.1471 2.4842 2.8966 2.7232 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 2.8351 2.7570 2.9141 2.9448 2.6384 2.9443 3.1468 2.4840 2.8964 2.7228 (2)-(1) -0.0031 -0.0033 -0.0039 -0.0038 -0.0040 -0.0058 -0.0064 -0.0055 -0.0066 -0.0058 (3M1) 0.0010 0.0006 0.0004 0.0006 0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0007 -0.0005 -0.0007 -0.0006 (4)-(1) 0.0002 0.0004 -0.0002 0.0001 -0.0003 -0.0006 -0.0010 -0.0007 -0.0009 -0.0009 Control foams Foam No. (1) Initial Weight (g) (2) Weight after test (g) 1 3.2067 3.2077 2 3.4778 3.4789 3 3.2658 3.2669 4 3.2403 3.2414 5 2.8079 2.8087 6 3.3458 3.3463 7 2.3998 2.4000 8 2.4749 2.4752 9 2.7522 2.7521 10 2.5925 2.5926 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 3.2076 3.4787 3.2667 3.2408 2.8080 3.3455 2.3994 2.4748 2.7516 2.5922 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 3.2073 3.4782 3.2659 3.2400 2.8074 3.3451 2.3990 2.4743 2.7512 2.5916 (2M1) 0.0010 0.001 1 0.0011 0.0012 0.0008 0.0005 0.0002 0.0003 -0.0001 0.0001 (3)~(1) (4)-( 1) 0.0010 0.0006 0.0010 0.0004 0.0009 0.0001 0.0005 -0.0003 0.0001 -0.0004 -0.0003 -0.0008 -0.0004 -0.0009 -0.0001 -0.0007 -0.0006 -0.0010 -0.0003 -0.0009 Contents Test 2. 30 ppi foams Test foams Foam No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (1) Initial Weight <g> 2.8343 2.7556 2.9127 2.9433 2.6371 2.9430 3.1455 2.4830 2.8951 2.7214 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.8300 2.7512 2.9082 2.9388 2.6331 2.9389 3.1403 2.4790 2.8910 2.7172 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.8340 2.7552 2.9125 2.9433 2.6371 2.9431 3.1455 2.4822 2.8953 2.7219 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 2.8315 2.7511 2.9115 2.9434 2.6371 2.9431 3.1453 2.4820 2.8948 2.7214 (2M1) (3H1) -0.0043 '-0.0003 -0.0044 -0.0004 -0.0045 -0.0002 -0.0045 0.0000 -0.0040 0.0000 -0.0041 0.0001 -0.0052 0.0000 -0.0040 -0.0008 -0.0041 0.0002 -0.0042 0.0005 (4)-{1) -0.0028 -0.0045 -0.0012 0.0001 0.0000 0.0001 -0.0002 -0.0010 -0.0003 0.0000 Control foams Foam No. 1 2 (1) Initial Weight (g> 3.2057 3.4762 3 3.2639 4 3.2383 5 2.8062 6 3.3437 7 . 2.3981 8 2.4732 9 2.7499 10 2.5902 (2) Weight after test (g) 3.2053 3.4761 3.2644 3.2384 2.8063 3.3438 2.3982 2.4734 2.7499 2.5902 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 3.2056 3.4762 3.2644 3.2386 2.8066 3.3442 2.3985 2.4736 2.7504 2.5909 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 3.2029 3.4733 3.2648 3.2391 2.8067 3.3440 2.3981 2.4732 2.7500 2.5905 (2)-(1) <3)-(1) -0.0004 -0.0001 -0.0001 0.0000 0.0005 0.0005 0.0001 0.0003 0.0001 0.0004 0.0001 0.0001 0.0005 0.0004 0.0002 0.0004 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0007 (4M1) -0.0028 -0.0029 0.0009 0.0008 0.0005 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0003 Contents Test 3. 30 ppi foams Test foams Foam No. 1 2 (1) Initial Weight (g) 2.8331 2.7545 3 2.91 16 4 2.9444 5 2.6364 6 2.9422 7 3.1445 8 2.4813 9 2.8938 10 2.7204 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.8297 2.751 1 2.9080 2.9377 2.6307 2.9360 3.1389 2.4770 2.8894 2.7165 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later <g) 2.8323 2.7535 2.9106 2.9412 2.6352 2.9409 3.1430 2.4802 2.8927 2.7197 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 2.8311 2.7522 2.9095 2.9405 2.6347 2.9401 3.1424 2.4796 2.8920 2.7192 (2)-(1) (3)-{1) (4)-(1) -0.0034 -0.0008 -0.0020 -0.0034 -0.0010 -0.0023 -0.0036 -0.0010 -0.0021 -0.0067 -0.0032 -0.0039 -0.0057 -0.0012 -0.0017 -0.0062 -0.0013 -0.0021 -0.0056 -0.0015 -0.0021 -0.0043 -0.0011 -0.0016 -0.0044 -0.0012 -0.0018 -0.0039 -0.0007 -0.0012 Control foams Foam number 1 2 (1) Initial Weight (g) 3.2046 3.4751 (2) Weight after test (g) 3.2045 3.4755 3 3.2632 3.2636 4 3.2375 3.2378 5 2.8045 2.8052 6 3.3428 3.3423 7 2.3973 2.3972 8 2.4722 2.4790 9 2.7489 2.7487 10 2.5895 2.5898 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 3.2035 3.4740 3.2621 3.2364 2.8043 3.3412 2.3964 2.4714 2.7479 2.5886 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) (2)-(1) (3)-(1) (4)-(1) 3.2022 3.4724 0.0000 0.0004 -0.0010 -0.0024 -0.0012 -0.0028 3.2611 0.0004 -0.001 1 -0.0021 3.2358 2.8037 0:0003 0.0007 -0.0011 -0.0018 -0.0003 -0.0009 3.3404 -0.0006 -0.0016 -0.0024 2.3959 -0.0001 -0.0009 -0.0014 2.4708 0.0068 -0.0008 -0.0013 2.7473 -0.0002 -0.0010 -0.0016 2.5885 0.0002 -0.0009 -0.0011 Contents Test 4. 90 ppi foams Test foams Foam number 1 (1) Initial Weight (g) 2.4370 2 2.5608 3 2.5697 4 2.4828 5 2.3930 6 2.3671 7 2.4393 8 2.4261 9 2.4371 10 2.4306 (2) Weight . after test (g) 2.4322 2.5552 2.5641 2.4780 2.3882 2.3629 2.4356 2.4209 2.4321 2.4248 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.4380 2.5619 2.5703 2.4835 2.3931 2.3676 2.4396 2.4260 2.4373 2.4300 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 2.4366 2.5604 2.5689 2.4822 2.3920 2.3665 2.4387 2.4253 2.4363 2.4289 (2)-( 1) (3H1) <4)-(1) -0.0049 0.0009 -0.0004 -0.0056 0.0011 -0.0004 -0.0056 0.0006 -0.0008 -0.0048 0.0007 -0.0006 -0.0048 0.0001 -0.0010 -0.0043 0.0005 -0.0006 -0.0037 0.0003 -0.0006 -0.0052 -0.0001 -0.0009 -0.0050 0.0002 -00008 -0.0058 -0.0006 -0,0017 Control foams Foam number 1 2 (1) Initial Weight (g) 2.9685 2.3037 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.9679 2.3035 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.9688 2.3041 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 2.9669 2.3027 (2M1) -0.0006 -0.0002 <3)-(1) 0.0003 0.0004 (4)-(1) -0.0016 -0.0010 3 2.9362 2.9351 2.9356 2.9339 -0.0011 -0.0006 -0.0023 4 2.4934 2.4928 2.4932 2.4918 -0.0006 -0.0002 -0.0015 5 2.5404 2.5392 2.5395 2.5383 -0.0012 -0.0009 -0.0021 6 2.3387 2.3383 2.3383 2.3373 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0014 7 8 9 10 2.8574 2.3716 2.6117 2.5924 2.8564 2.3708 2.6119 2.5927 2.8566 2.3709 2.6121 2.5927 2.8554 2.3701 2.6108 2.5913 -0.0010 -0.0008 0.0002 0.0004 -0.0008 -0.0007 0.0004 0.0004 -0.0020 -0.0015 -0.0009 -0.0011 Contents Test 5. 90 ppi foams Test foams Foam No. 1 (1) Initial Weight (g) 2.4370 2 2.5610 3 2.5693 4 2.4825 5 2.3923 6 2.3668 7 2.4389 8 2.4253 9 2.4363 10 2.4288 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.4321 2.5554 2.5641 2.4775 2.3875 2.3620 2.4346 2.4206 2.4321 2.4246 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.4367 2.5607 2.5691 2.4825 2.3922 2.3669 2.4389 2.4256 2.4368 2.4295 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) (2)-( 1) (3M1) (4)-( 1) 2.4369 -0.0049 -0.0003 -0.0001 2.5692 -0.0056 -0.0003 0.0082 2.5692 -0.0052 -0.0002 -0.0001 2.4828 -0.0050 0.0000 0.0003 2.3923 -0.0048 -0.0001 0.0000 2.3669 -0.0048 0.0001 0.0001 2.4389 -0.0043 0.0000 0.0000 2.4254 -0.0047 0.0003 0.0001 2.4365 -0.0042 0.0005 0.0002 2.4293. -0.0042 0.0007 0.0005 Control foams Foam No. 1 2 3 4 (1) Initial Weight <g) 2.9674 2.3032 2.9344 2.4923 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.9671 2.3030 2.9343 2.4922 5 2.5386 2.5386 6 2.3375 2.3375 7 2.8555 2.8558 8 2.3700 2.3703 9 2.6108 2.6112 10 2.5914 2.5919 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.9673 2.3031 2.9343 2.4920 2.5385 2.3375 2.8559 2.3705 2.6116 2.5922 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) 2.9674 2.3033 2.9345 2.4921 2.5386 2.3374 2.8557 2.3702 2.6113 2.5920 <2)-(1) -0.0003 -0.0002 -0.0001 -0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 (3)-(1) -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0003 -0.0001 0.0000 0.0004 0.0005 0.0008 0.0008 (4M1) 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 -0.0002 0.0000 -0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0005 0.0006 Contents Test 6. 90 ppi foams Test foams Foam No. 1 2 3 4 5 (1) Initial Weight (g) 2.4380 2.5630 2.5692 2.4823 2.3924 6 2.3666 7 2.4391 8 2.4255 9 2.4362 10 2.4286 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.4376 2.5625 2.5687 2.4817 2.3917 2.3658 2.4384 2.4248 2.4355 2.4279 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.4379 2.5629 2.5691 2.4822 2.3923 2.3665 2.4390 2.4254 2.4361 2.4285 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) (2M1) (3)-( 1 2.4379 -0.0440 -0.0059 2.5629 -0.0471 -0.0087 2.5691 -0.0474 -0.0072 2.4822 -0.0615 -0.0065 2.3923 -0.0691 -0.0058 2.3665 -0.0762 -0.0066 2.4390 -0.0725 -0.0057 2.4254 -0.0664 -0.0076 2.4361 -0.0739 -0.0126 2.4285 -0.0680 -0.0108 (4)-<1) -0.0101 -0.0116 -0.0085 -0.0107 -0.0123 -0.0098 -0.0093 -0.0107 -0.0147 -0.0113 Control foams Foam No. 1 (1) Initial Weight <g) 2.9672 2 2.3034 3 2.9341 4 2.4927 5 2.5384 6 2.3373 7 2.8558 8 2.3703 9 2.6106 10 2.5911 (2) Weight after test (g) 2.9672 2.3034 2.9341 2.4927 2.5384 2.3373 2.8558 2.3703 2.6106 2.591 1 (3) Weight 0.5 hr later (g) 2.9671 2.3033 2.9340 2.4927 2.5384 2.3373 2.8557 2.3702 2.6105 2.5910 (4) Weight 2 hr later (g) <2)-( 1 (3)-(1) (4)-<1) 2.9671 2.3033 2.9340 0.0018 0.0002 0.0017 -0.0066 -0.0071 -0.0079 -0.0109 -0.01 15 -0.0127 2.4926 2.5383 2.3372 2.8557 2.3702 0.0032 0.0042 0.0019 -0.0008 -0.0009 -0.0048 -0.0023 -0.0041 -0.0069 -0.0066 -0.0109 -0.0090 -0.0098 -0.0132 -0.0103 2.6105 2.5910 -0.0013 -0.0103 -0.0135 0.0001 -0.0099 -0.0120 Contents Appendix C BLANK TESTS WITH LARGE FOAM DISKS Contents 30 ppi foams Contents 90 ppi foams Contents 30 ppi foams Contents 90 ppi foams Contents Test 3 Contents 90 ppi foams 0.00650 0.00322. 0.00660 0.00270 0.00506 0.00735 0.00198 0.00016 3 CM o 05 05 r- CO 05 05 o in in CO ooo o o o oo oo oo9oo CO co r- CM in CO O O oOo ooo ooo </> r-- w --- E cm 3 O +2 ro 05 fc o+- or- I"* x-- 05 CO T-- 05 CM r-* CO CO CO CO CO CO in CM o CO V) T-- 05 E 05 CO co 05 CO M" o CO CO CM LL JZ CO 05 "a CO CO 05 CO CO CO CO in m CO in CO W5 in co CO - s c t-- X-- T-- r~ i-- 05 T-- r-- S -C 4-> o H o flj <2 Or M o) 52 cm 3? 2 a> -5 CM CO CO 05 CM CM lO o o *<fr 05 05 00 T-- r-- CM 05 't 05 CO CD 05 CO CD CD CO in in r-- CM in CO in -- 05 o co CO in co CM 00 in CO tn co CO r-- E ra w .c t ^ --o>- O -Q, Q) U_ -5S51 iO 05 --' J3 r- t-- CM CO _ in CO CO O CO CO CO CO in CM 05 r- CO 00 co_ CP 05 co_ CO CD CO in in r-- co CM in r> 05 LO co LO CO CM CO in CO in <6 CD Contents 30 ppi foams Contents 90 ppi foams --- CM CD 00 CD CO CM in in r- in O CD in CO in *-* in M- CM in CD CD in 1 ooOOo ooO in oOOOo OoO dooOo ooo CO p T-- p-* CD co o <fr in O r- CM r-- CM r-- CM o CO CD CM r-- .__. oOoOo oO o oOoOo ooo ooooo ooo o p- CM CD CO CM in ^ CO CO o o r- P" in o o O *-- CM T-- CM T-- ooooo Ooo ooooo ooo co ooooo ooo CO o o o CO oo CO CM CO CO CD CM r-' o M* o CO -- O t-- r- o__. ooooO oO o ooooO o o ooooo ooo w co ^ ~ cm ? b CO *-- T-- CM T-- CD CM p in CD C/3 i-- o oo b CD CO 't O +2 ra W3 U. (A 0) __ 05 i= ** o.zi > o5-ct Ho-- "5 C r>CO CO LO J-- CO CO cd in r-- 'Cf CM p- in T-- Ot-- CO CD \-- CO CO CO in CO Mo-- C0 03 H CM O CD CD t-- o CM CO CD t-- CD CO in CO o to o 't t; g u- 03 *-< i J o p" CO M* t-- CO CO CO T-- in 00 in M" 0 CD CO CM CO oo <j) p- 00 00 in in r** . T-- in T-- CD r-- in <-- O CD CM in P1- CD CM CO O CM CD CD CO in CO CD CD r-- f-- t-- w *--- - ro w t; o C/5 ^ O) ro 2 a) <o *3 ' ^ o w to CM ? 2 0) -5 CO o CO in om- F"* 00 CM in CM in CO CO r-> M- CM <-- CO 00^ 05 r-" CO co_ tn in in CD in T-*"- T~ CO in in p" oo M- CO CO 00 CO M" cn CD 0- CM -- CO 00 cd p* 00 00 in in in CD in in CD p" O o CD CO MO CM CD CD CO in CD CD CD r-- o CM CM CO o 00 CM MO CM CD CD CO in CD CD CD w _c -- <0 +- OS u_ `.nSi3 03- +._,; m-- CD ' JD CO CO in in 00 CM oCO 00 CD r-- CD oCM p-* M- CM i-- O' CO cd r- CO 00 in in in CD m CO O P<xP CD O CM M- in T-- CM CD CD CO LO CO CD CD Contents 30 ppi foams Contents 90 ppi foams in r-> 03 *-- co CO in in 00 r*v CD 03 OooOo ooOoo 6oooo CO 03 O CO 03 00 CO CN oOo ooo ooo CO r- r- CcnM r co co o CN N" r- 0i--3 m CD CO CO co 00 00 T-- CN CN CN CN CN CN r-- oOo O O Ooo CO ooooo ooo ** K 03 co r-' co in r* CD o o CN CN CN 0T--0 CD CN CN O 0T--3 03 *-- N" r0-0> CO CO CN T--- J- oOoOO oOo o oo o o ooo <S) CO *" -- E N ? E r-- CO 03 r -- in 'vf- 00 in oo r-- 03 O ro w co CN CO CD w in d' 00 oEra CD 't 03 r-- co co CO in r- Ll_ -C c/D 0J 03 1- "o *-* co in CO in CD co CO CD CD CD in o C/3 CD CO CD ci s 2 T-- r-- t-- 0) r*-- J-- r-- o5 .c d 1- u co 't: w O 10 W U- o> S co 2? 5 co co CN in cn O CO r- 03 03 o ID CN O co in in CN T-- CD n 03 C0 CD CO CD in in CO CD CD o r-- in co CO v-- CO 00 03 r>- r-- in in o CD CD cb aoj & `t; P ro W 03 2 N 3 d) 5 -C t= E w .c -- CO ts *-' o> O -b, CD u. .E5 - *-i mOW ^^ CD "-' _Q CO o r-* cn cn in CO in in O in co CN r- 03 in CN ^-- CD in co CO CD CO CD in in CO CO CD r~~ <fr CO CD O 00 CO CN *-- CD in x-- CO 03 r- N- CO 00 r- 00 co CD CO co in in CO CO CD T-- oo m o ID r-- r*- 00 CD t-- co mo CD CO cb co CO CO 03 03 CO CN C" 03 r- in -- o CD CD cb r~ r~* Contents Appendix D ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE DATA FROM THE OPTIMISATION EXPERIMENTS Contents ANOVA of the total dust data Full length Half length Mean value Sum of values Sum of squares Mean value Sum 1 of -- value- s- Sum of squares I sum of values AIO FI 200 100g 200g No Spacer Spacer No Spacer Spacer r-- CD 52 65 186 154 139 196 17930 11414 6642 13098 29 127 109 295 381 333 33326 39561 481 225 520 529 Granular Fertiliser 100g 200g No Spacer Spacer No Spacer Spacer CD CO (7) oo CN C0D0 CO CO 46 57 108 4338 1115 3888 7274 CinD 59 59 168 178 1154 13843 9795 10835 257 ; 276 316 CO CoX--D CO CO Totals 1672 | 2765 99 08 191 86 CD Oco 00 oo CN u_ CO O 00 < r- ANOVA of the 30ppi foam data Full length Half length Mean value Sum of values Sum of squares Mean value Sum of values Sum of squares I sum of values CinN 100g No Spacer Spacer 39 158 117 15366 7667 CN 240 24422 398 26 300 143 CT) CN CD 200g No Spacer Spacer 34 103 3545 57 172 172 9954 233 275 CN Oo CN CN CD Oo CO 00 Granular Fertiliser 200g No Spacer Spacer No Spacer Spacer 00 r- T-- r- 37 782 457 26 79 141 2091 67 116 CinD in 869 36 108 3920 54 1220 27 82 2284 136 Totals 629 898 1527 Conients 5 Source 1 /Material 2/Spacer 3/Length 4/Mass 1&2 1&3 1&4 2&3 2&4 3&4 1,2&3 1,2&4 1,3&4 2,3&4 Error Total ANOVA table for the total masses Degrees of freedom Sum of squares Mean square 1 11563 11563 1 257 257 1 6984 6984 1 5569 5569 1 3056 3056 1 1112 1112 1 595 595 1 230 230 1 910 910 1 2993 2993 1 4982 4982 1 2147 2147 1 2228 2228 1 438 438 18 22560 1253 32 65621 2051 F statistic 9.2 0.2 5.6 4.4 2.4 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.7 2.4 4.0 1.7 1.8 0.3 F > 4.45 for significant effect. Contents Source 1 /Material 2/Spacer 3/Length 4/Mass 1&2 1&3 1&4 2&3 2&4 3&4 1 f2&3 1,2&4 1,3&4 2,3&4 Error Total ANOVA table for the 90 ppi foams Degrees of freedom Sum of squares Mean square 1 48 48 1 70 70 1 1121 1121 1 2352 2352 1 243 243 1 252 252 1 884 884 1 96 96 1 16 16 1 140 140 1 660 660 1 37 37 1 432 432 1 520 520 18 1822 101 32 8694 272 F statistic 0.5 0.7 11.1 23.3 2.4 2.5 8.8 1.0 0.2 1.4 6.5 0.4 4.3 5.1 F > 4.45 for significant effect. Contents . Source 1 /Material 2/Spacer 3/Length 4/Mass 1&2 1&3 1&4 2&3 2&4 3&4 1,2&3 1,2&4 1,3&4 2,3&4 Error Total ANOVA table for the 30 ppi foams Degrees of freedom Sum of squares Mean square 1 6793 6793 1 729 1 1508 729' 1508 1 130 130 1 1190 1190 1 11 1 111 1 438 438 1 624 624 1 1055 1 1419 1055 1419 1 1376 1376 1 2837 1 285 2837 285 1 20 18 19348 20 1075 32 37861 1183 F statistic 6.3 0.7 1.4 0.1 1.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.3 1.3 2.6 0.2 0.0 F > 4.45 for significant effect. Contents CU|%.U. . <l Source 1 /Material 2/Spacer 3/Length 4/Mass 1&2 1&3 1&4 2&3 2&4 3&4 1,2&3 1,2&4 1,3&4 2,3&4 Error Total ANOVA table for the filter data Degrees of freedom Sum of squares Mean square 1 331 331 17 7 1 127 127 1 217 217 1 27 27 1 48 48 1 243 243 10 0 13 3 1 27 27 1 61 61 111 1 91 91 1 77 18 173 10 32 1361 43 F statistic 33.1 0.7 12.7 21.7 2.7 4.8 24.3 0.0 0.3 2.7 6.1 0.1 9.1 0.7 F > 4.45 for significant effect. Contents Appendix E RESULTS OF TESTS WITH THE NEW PROTOTYPE TESTER USING A RANGE OF INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 1 Material: 1 Animal Feed Temp: 19C: Humidity: 41% All masses in g . . Run 1 Run 2 :::Test:.'' Control ; Test ' Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 16.687 16.322 .365 12.970 12.966 .004 15.938 15.601 .337 15.843 15.843 0 0.361 0.337 12.812 12.783 .029 12.340 12.341 -.001 12.990 12.960 .030 12.684 12.684 0 0.030 0.030 .32971 .32964 .32694 .32686 .00007 0.00008 Run 3 Test Control 16.542 16.213 .329 14.643 14.642 .001 0.328 12.984 12.954 .030 13.266 13.273 -.007 0.037 .32866 .32854 0.00012 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.342 0.017 0.032 0.004 .00009 00002 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 2 Material: 2 Animal Feed Temp: 19.4C: Humidity: 41% All masses in g 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust Run 1 Run 2 Test > \* ' .. Control::!; Test ' Control 16.288 15.844 16.080 15.837 .208 .007 0.201 12.349 12.680 12.295 12.678 .054 .002 0.052 .33021 .32704 .00387 14.619 14.644 14.406 14.646 .213 -.002 0.215 12.518 12.332 12.447 12.340 .071 -.008 0.079 .33504 .33037 .00467 Run 3 Test Control 16.071 15.844 15.812 15.843 .259 .001 0.258 13.627 13.266 13.566 13.273 .061 -.007 0.068 .33406 .32866 .00540 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.225 0.003 0.067 0.014 0.00465 0.00077 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 25 Material: Animal Feed (Repeat of Test 2 Temp: 19.2C: Humidity: 38% All masses in g v?! ; '' ' ^ 30 ppi Foam Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust . Run 1 -Runs 2: Run 3 ' Test-. Control ; ". TestpH Control v ,7,. Test:.. Control 16.505 15.590 16.054 15.588 .451 + .002 0.449 12.004 12.327 11.915 12.329 .089 -0.002 0.091 .33841 .33241 .00600 16.652 15.319 16.246 15.320 .406 -.001 .407 13.282 13.192 11.856 11.863 .090 -0.007 0.097 .33989 .33249 .00740 16.546 16.161 15.145 15.142 .385 .003 .382 12.849 12.764 12.724 12.726 .085 -0.002 0.087 .33390 .32694 .00696 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.413 0.034 0.092 0.005 0.00679 + 0.00072 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 3 Material: 3 Animal Feed Temp: 19C: Humidity: 42% All masses in g <: , Run T Run 2 ;;;.;i:iTeSt::"|;: Control::/ Test ; ; > Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 19.582 12.969 16.338 3.244 12.978 .001 3.243 13.080 12.334 12.892 12.334 .188 0 0.188 .33773 .32668 .01105 18.983 14.643 15.772 3.211 14.641 .002 3.209 13.064 12.681 12.873 12.681 .191 0 0.191 .34136 .33028 .01108 Run 3 Test Control 19.757 15.842 16.654 3.103 15.840 .002 3.101 12.479 13.263 12.287 .192 13.270 -.007 0.199 .33814 .32671 .01143 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 3.184 0.074 0.193 0.006 0.01119 + 0.00021 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 4 Material: 4 Hard Granular Beads Temp: 19.4C: Humidity: 42% All masses in g ' /'' * ' ` > After 30 ppi Foam Before Difference Mass of dust After 90 ppi Foam Before Difference Mass of dust After Filter Before Mass of dust 1 Run T ; TeSt^ Control; Run 2 Test. Control::;; Run 3 Test Control --a-- - ==s Mean value of three runs standard deviation 15.671 12.966 15.937 14.634 15.809 15.834 15.677 -.006 12.966 0 15.951 -.014 14.643 -.009 15.817 -.008 15.837 -.003 -0.005 -0.001 -0.006 -0.005 -0.005 12.635 13.264 12.539 13.256 13.127 12.326 12.646 -.011 13.264 0 12.551 -.012 13.267 -.011 13.133 -.010 12.334 -.008 -0.005 0.006 -0.011 -0.001 -0.002 .32746 .32744 + 0.00002 .32815 .32813 + .00002 .32506 .32503 +.00003 0.00002 0.00001 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 30 Material: Yellow Beads Temp: 19.7C: Humidity: 53% All masses in g Run I - . :;>;Ruh 2 Test: ; Control : Test i:: Control Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust .32868 .32713 .32866 .32715 .00002 -.00002 .00004 .32560 .32682 .32540 .32682 .00020 0 .00020 Run 3 Test Control .32741 .33059 .32732 .33058 .00009 .00001 .00008 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.00011 0.00008 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 5 Material: 5 Moist Peat Temp: 17.8C: 'Humidity: 34% All masses in g 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust Run 1 ,'s ; - i-- as -- =r Run 2 Run 3 Test Control Test Control Test Control 15.616 15.546 16.204 16.192 .070 .012 0.058 12.706 12.655 12.664 .042 12.654 .001 0.041 .33014 .33011 .00003 15.887 15.817 .070 16.062 16.058 .004 0.066 13.280 13.244 13.020 13.027 .036 -.007 0.043 .33061 . .33058 .00003 14.689 15.309 14.618 15.300 .071 .009 0.062 11.455 12.651 11.417 12.661 .038 -.010 0.048 .32912 .32908 .00004 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.062 0.004 0.044 0.004 . 0.00003 0.00001 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 6 Material: 6 Calcined Alumina, Fine White Powder Temp: 18C: Humidity: 35% All masses in g Run 1 Test :. Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 13.425 16.196 12.948 16.196 .477 0 0.477 12.829 12.700 12.676 12.703 .153 -.003 0.156 .34601 .32603 .01998 Run 2 Test Control 15.933 15.398 16.055 16.062 .535 -.007 0.542 11.980 13.023 11.800 13.030 .180 -.007 0.187 .34993 .32862 .02131 Run 3 Test Control 15.919 15.303 15.369 15.303 .550 0 0.550 12.952 12.654 12.765 12.659 .187 -.005 0.192 .35079 .32744 .02335 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.523 0.040 0.178 0.019 0.02155 0.0017 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 7 Material: 7 Silica Flour Temp: 18.1C: Humidity: 37% All masses in g Run 1 Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 16.201 16.203 15.965 .236 16.203 0 0.236 12.539 12.707 12.446 .093 12.710 -.003 0.096 .36975 .32948 .04027 Run 2 Test Control 15.448 16.061 15.161 .287 16.060 .001 0.286 12.901 13.031 12.807 13.030 .094 .001 0.093 .36426 .32705 .03721 Run 3 Test Control 14.551 14.187 .364 15.308 15.311 -.003 0.367 13.262 12.664 13.165 .097 12.666 -.002 0.099 .36666 .32826 .03840 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.296 0.07 0.095 0.002 0.03863 0.00154 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 8 Material: 8 Graphite Temp: 18.8C: Humidity: 40% All masses in g 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test Control Test Control Test Control 27.100 14.955 16.209 16.214 12.145 -.005 12. 150 13.217 12.710 12.761 12.716 .456 -.006 0.462 .35789 .32914 .02875 28.206 16.010 16.075 16.079 12.199 -.005 12.203 13.210 12.741 12.714 12.721 .469 -.007 . 0.476 .35750 .32792 0.02958 28.531 16.195 15.315 15.323 . 12.452 -.008 12.460 12.894 12.718 12.459 12.724 .435 -.006 0.441 .36704' .32760 0.03944 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 12.271 0.17 0.460 0.018 0.03259 0.00595 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 9 Material: 9 Nepheiline Syenite White Powder Temp: 19.4C: Humidity: 48% All masses in g Run 1 Test.0: Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 26.504 15.172 16.091 15.176 0.413 -.004 0.415 11.539 12.356 11.471 12.356 0.068 0 0.068 .36118 .33171 0.02937 Run 2 Test Control 16.520 15.619 16.125 15.619 0.395 0 0.393 13.113 12.752 13.055 12.752 0.058 0 0.058 .35738 .33279 0.02459 Run; 3 Test Control 15.941 15.347 15.721 15.350 0.220 -0.003 0.223 12.877 11.890 12.822 11.892 0.055 -0.002 0.057 .35485 .33006 0.02479 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.344 .105 0.061 0.006 0.02625 0.0027 Contents 2 < O LL QCL- O G> u_ O h2- Occ U_ 2 C05 CL LU H_J LL E UJ cc m LL C/3 C/3 < <J LU F2 LU CO LU 2 _J LU X CL LU 3 z j= MATERIAL 9 Foam p o ro sity (ppi) Before oo oo oo cn CO 30.00 30.00 | 30.00 16320.87 15536.80 15493.60 14414.91 16155.13 w<o E ECoO ou. C o A fte r 16284.41 15502.07 15459.67 14384.56 16120.38 CO o CO LD CM CO 05 CO CO D iffe re n c e Before -36.46 -34.73 -30.35 -34.75 15788.07 .. . 15276.90 16315.77 A fte r 16063.87 15786.08 16864.84 - +w<-D* h- E HnOs- CQ <re/s} D iffe re n c e 509.18 549.07 OtoT CD E *w- D Q Mass collected 309.84 543.22 583.1 1 Mean mass Standard deviation 478.73 O) E Date T em perature (deg C) Rh (%) 9 Feb 1993 16.6 11 Feb 1993 15.0 54 0o0 oo Ko 5 Contents Filter 1 Filter 2 Filter 3 1358.58 1354.60 1361.15 1358.55 1354.81 1361.24 -0.03 0.21 0.09 1340.81 1345.67 ' 1357.16 1447.81 1454.47 1477.51 108.80 120.35 106.91 120.26 111.96 7.24 Dustiness test No. 31 Material: Nepheline Syenite Temp: 19.6C: Humidity: 39% All masses in g :|Ruri'v1 . . ^ Run 2 Run 3 :;;:::test : Control:! Test : Control | Test Control 30 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust 16.035 15.331 15.752 15.330 .283 .001 0.282 1.441 1.332 1.352 1.352 .109 0 0.109 15.759 15.252 15.552 15.550 .507 0.002 0.505 1.450 1.352 1.340 1.355 .110 -0.003 0.113 16.842 16.295 15.596 15.597 .547 -0.001 0.548 1.471 1.352 1.353 1.351 .118 0.001 0.117 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.445 0.143 0.113 0.004 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 10 Material: 10 Talc White Powder Temp: 20C: Humidity: 50% All masses in g fJ' ' 'V. . > Run 1 V ' Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 22.813* 15.173 15.148 15.175 7.765 -0.002 7.767 12.904 12.355 12.391 12.355 0.513 0 0.513 .35320 .33034 0.02286 30 ppi foam test 1 sample lost Run 2 Test Control 22.561 15.614 15.222 7.339 15.618 0.004 7.335 13.206 12.748 12.676 12.750 0.530 -0.002 0.532 .35490 .33219 0.02271 Run 3 Test Control 23.625 15.342 15.763 15.344 7.862 -0.002 7.864 13.202 11.891 12.700 11.891 0.502 0 0.502 .35582 .33230 0.02352 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 7.655 0.282 0.515 0.015 0.02352 + 0.00011 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 24 Material: Talc - Repeat of Test 10 Temp: 19.5C; Humidity: 39% All masses in g 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference. Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust . Run 1 ' . Test yi. Control 23.597 15.315 15.588 15.319 8.009 -0.004 8.013 13.085 12.541 11.857 11.859 0.544 -0.002 0.546 .35644 .33332 0.02312 Run: 2:: . . . Run 3 Test Control Test Control 22.298 15.140 15.142 15.144 7.158 -0.002 7.150 13.612 13.056 12.724 12.729 0.556 -0.005 0.561 .35152 .32842 0.02310 22.119 15.593 14.609 15.593 7.510 0.000 7.510 13.528 12.333 12.689 12.334 0.839 -0.001 0.840 .35386 .33112 0.02274 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 7.561 0.429 0.649 0.166 0.02299 0.00021 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 11 Material: 11 Plaster White Powder Temp: C: Humidity: All masses in g Run: 1/ - ^ Run 2 Test ; ' Control ::I Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After ' Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 16.416 15.174 16.296 15.180 0.120 -0.006 0.126 13.203 12.352 13.187 12.358 0.016 -0.006 0.022 .34005 .32909 .01096 16.110 15.618 16.009 15.621 0.101 -0.003 -0.104 12.503 12.749 12.488 12.754 0.025 -0.005 0.030 .34009 .32970 0.01039 Run 3 Test Control 15.670 15.346 15.561 0.109 15.350 -0.004 0.113 12.830 12.749 12.812 12.752 0.028 -0.003 0.031 34207 .32984 0.01223 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.114 0.011 0.028 0.005 0.01119 + 0.00094 Contents Contents Contents 12 LOO'OT losu'o SOOT 290*1 912*0* O09'2 L uoaeiAap pjt'pUBlS 7 sum aajip io anjeA uea^ 988l I'O 9282S* . L 12**' 280' l LOO'O- 288'l 992'2 L LS9*2L *9221 86' L 889'21 0 88S'2L 229*91 229'S l 889'9 L 92**82 891 WO L9920* *188** 60** l 0 60*'l *68'L L 608 21 *6811 8*2'* l 996*21 0 996'2l *2 L*91 299*91 *2 L*Sl 289*82 9S8 11*0 81002* 698*** 618*1 SOO'O- 608*1 292'2L 20**21 2*2'2 t l*2' l 888*21 900*0- 888'21 2*8*91 2*8*91 628*91 299 82 lOJiuoo 1S31 :?v|ojjup^;g; J:: isaj. x|0J1U0Q 8 uny : ?v y;.;:^.::i2-uria^ .;*': ; ' - l uny,/;--, isnp ssbin ajoiag J81|!d ja^V isnp io sseiAl aouajatpa ajoiag uieoj idd 06 jaijv isnp to sseiN aouajaniQ ajoiag jailV aieoj !dd 08 p; B UJ.SaSSBUJ ||V %09 :Ai!piujnH :0o8*6l 'diuai jnydins (8|dtues 6 OOD JapMoy M0!I8A 21 :|eu3ie|/\| ZL on isai ssaupsna Contents Contents 2000 + 2900 two* L9 ro uoiieiAap pjepuejs T sum aajqt to anjeA ueaw e90'0 1000 *90' SSl 2SEL 930 1 9L*`l 6 L'O 2000- LZl` 063'SL 9frSSl 889 31 989`9 L 090'0 0 090' SL IS' l 0S0L l IV l 98 L'O LOO'O 381- ISS'Sl 993'3 L 239-31 13231 290'0 0 290' ZSl E*`L 290 1 30fr`l 291/0 900'0- 19 L' '9l Z.96 S L 820-3L 811/91 lOJiuoo isai JOJJU03 isaj. I-'IOJIUOO /: :Jsai ony >v 7v. '. Z uny 7: 1 unyf ;; jsnp to ssey\| aouajatiia ajotag J3HV jsnp to sseiAi aouajattia ajotog J3HV jatljj tueoj !dd 0 ; B u sassetu-iiy;| %8 :Aj!piujnH :D08'6l 'dwai ja;sB|d :|eijajBiA| ZZ `ON isai ssaupsnQ Contents Dustiness test No. 1 3 Material: 13 Centrimex Coarse White Powder Temp: 19.7C: Humidity: 52% All. masses in g S# : Run T Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 16.158 15.204 15.356 15.362 .954 -0.006 0.960 13.000 12.364 12.744 .256 12.370 -0.006 0.262 .36079 .32761 .03317 Run 2 . ; Run 3 Test Control; .''"'".Test : Control 16.703 15.181 15.948 15.189 .755 -0.007 0.762 13.060 11.896 12.851 11.898 .209 -0.002 0.211 .35886 .32815 0.03071 16.322 15.622 15.635 15.626 .687 -0.004 0.691 13.140 12.754 12.936 12.757 .204 -0.003 0.207 .35899 ' .32897 0.02992 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.809 + 0.139 ' 0.227 0.031 0.03127 0.00170 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 14 Material: 14 Centrimex Fine White Powder Temp: 19.6C: Humidity: 48% 100 g in Drum All masses in g Run 1 Tests Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 29.320 15.354 15.605 15.615 13.976 -0.010 13.986 14.227 1 1.883 12.755 11.890 1.472 -0.007 1.479 43923 33331 0.10592 Run 2 Testr'- Control 30.234 14.961 15.341 15.349 15.273 -0.008 15.281 13.848 12.743 12.102 12.750 1.746 0.007 1.753 .44534 .33408 0.11126 Run 3 Test Control 29.236 14.471 15.168 15.171 14.765 -0.003 14.768 14.055 12.350 12.543 12.358 1.512 -0.008 1.520 .44679 .33303 0.11376 Mean value of three runs - standard deviatjon 14.678 0.652 1.581 0.150 0.11068 0.0037 Contents 13 C .2 a co CO > in -6 in r- v> C0O3 c <o o 5 a o to K r- T3 w CO to 00 rv rinf If $CN 05 ino- n- 00 00 o cs CN CN u c CO 05 r-. 05 CO O) 05 r~ CN 05 00 Q CO CN CO U5 O CN CN CO co CO CO C0j CN CN CN to 05 0) 00 O O o CO CO 05 r-~- r- in in in rCN CO CO oCN O' CN co CN P-. 05 r- CO c-.' 05 o CO CN CN O in CN o o o O) CO CN CO cn CO CN CO r-- to <o' CN to CO to O' CO in 05 CD in O *-- co in CN CN CN o CO in CO w CN CO o in to CO in <0 0) 00 -- in O' cd CO o c CO CD co to CD <o co 05 CO o- CN CN CN CN CN a r-CN CO in 00 f' CO CO CO CO o- r-- o to in CN CN CN CN to irnv IN CO CN 05 CN CO Oin fi CO d CO CN *-- o C0 CO CinN in o in O' o- CO 05 o o 05 CO in o r-. in o * o' CO 05 in CD r> CD CN CO in oin CO N- T-CO (N CO rv 05 CN in O' in CO *"* o to CO r> i0n5 to r- CN O CN CN CN CN O' in 05 05 05 CN CO r- o CN CO V-- in to co to CN 05 co to r-- O' o CN CN CN CN O' CO 05 in u. to in to 05 in in il o 2. a. O O Oo o qOoo o odood C0 to CO to CO o q O O o o o O o o o d oO o 05 05 05 05 05 3_ i U O -C E 73 CL h- Contents *g- -5 01 -o r<1-; 280.57 178.81 181.47 Maas collected 3820.66 2238.31 2438.74 169.08 171.74 Difference 3811.88 2229.53 2429.96 00 br- CM CM o CM 0) . in in d in d CM CO < 01 01 u (0 o 01 in <0 in <0 in in i<ono CO 01 CO o CO <0 CM f-- to CO to CM CO CO 0) CM CM CM <r CM Cl 01 CM to 01 in in to CM CM CM O c CM to CM <N to t* Cl 01 CM CO 00 CO CO o> '6 CM CO CO Ol 01 T 01 ' d 00 0) CM CO o 01 ro CO CO o tM 01 d to to d < o in r O' to in. in tr to CO Ol 't 01 o o CM in 01 CO r- to 0) 1-- 6 r-* 00 W-- 01 t** CM r-~ o CM CM CM M- o o I** CO Cl CM CM 01 in d <0 ifi id n 01 in m <o (O iinn in 't to 03 O CM CM CM o O Ol 01 o CM cf a CM CM cn CM P-. o P*. CM r* r-- CM CM CM W a Q. E" to o o o o o o o o o o d 6 d d dj to C0 to C0 CO O O O o O O o O o o d d d o' o cn 01 O) Ol 01 o <* to to 01 tJ CO cd in It tf co CO C0 r-. Ol * CM 01 r- in 01 o CO CM to CO M to 3_ Q. E2 Contents Dustiness test No. 15 Material: 15 Calcium Sterate, Soft White Sticky Powder Temp: 19.5C: Humidity: 46% All masses in g After 30' ppi ` Before' Foam : Difference Mass of dust .. '. After 90 ppi.. Before Foam , Difference Mass of dust Filter' After Before : Mass of dust Run 1. 'v Run-2V. .: > Run 3 Test Controls : i;:" TeSt , Control.;. .. - TesTv-' Control 19.738 15.605 15.926 15.613 3.812 -0.008 3.820 `12.795 11.882 12.530 11.884 0.265 -0.002 0.267 .35180 .33527 0.01653 17.577 15.333 15.359 15.334 2.218 -0.001 2.219 12.831 12.740 12.657 12.743 0:174 -0.003 0.177 .34364 .32999 0.01365 18.888 16.464 15.158 15.163 2.424 -0.005 2.429 ' 12.895 12.344 12.720 12.349 0.175 -0.005 0.180 .34396 .33074 0.01322 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 2.823 0.870 0.208 0.051 0.01447 + 0.00180 Contents 5 ?| o> in -a CO oin CD O' in CO 4 r T3 in O' 2 o o Cl If to o o <n 4 o o i e u c ai Cl o s i 't 4 in <0 o 4 O Q 4 i in _ r* in ai in t-- < r*> CO CO CO 03 cf O' in Cl in 4 CO in O' f-' 4 h> o in r- CO CO CO ci 4 i CO o 4 4 h- 1 a 3 O; T* i Cl Cl o cO 4 CO 4 3 3 .9 4 3 .4 4 CO 1 -- to 00 03 Cl O' 4 <* r- *** C> to CO to 00 (O Cl 6 CD m <0 i in in to O CO CO in in i CO 03 O' 4 1 4 CO co 4 ) o c i f-- r- o O^ o 01 i O' CO o** m in in O' in Q O W-- Cl . ci <0 i CO o M, 4 CO to 4 O' o- o O' 03 **-- < o a o o- 4 03 in i O -- CO <o CO in in <0 in in "t <0 *" f rar- 4 Cl o in q 4 in o 4 o i 03 o <4 to in o- f-- to in in O' <0 00 CO 00 00 r- CO co m i 01 O' CO in in 4 CO o CO o- CO 4 4 4 4 't r- - CO * m 4 lO O; in CO o CO CO ci co 03 r-- in 03 r- 4 o- r- o 4 4 4 4 O' *> o .'5. <0 Oo o q oo o o oo_ do odo 3 to C0 CO o o O O o q O O o o do ddd 0) Cl 01 Cl Cl 3 03 to r~~ CO C3 CO 03 in to to r in o 3_ a <-> >? a> C3> o a -C E5 cc o H ir Contents Dustiness test No. 26 Material: Calcium Sterate (Repeat of Tests 1 5 and 28) Temp: 18.6C: Humidity: 38% All masses in g After 30 ppi Foam Before Difference Mass of dust . After ; 90 ppi ' Before Foam Difference Mass of dust After Filter Before Mass of dust Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test ^Control??::? :.:TeSt: i Control??: .Test:???..' Control 17.820 15.549 15.852 15.547 1.968 + 0.002 1.966 12.899 12.330 12.727 12.332 .172 -0.002 0.174 .34699 .33213 .01486 16.784 15.610 15.607 15.618 1.177 -0.008 1.185 12.954 11.886 12.844 ' 11.887 ,110 -0.001 0.111 .33886 .33088 .00798 18.273 15.350 16.303 ' 15.365 1.970 -0.015 1.985 12.627 12.764 12.473 .154 12.76V + 0.003 0.157 .34134 .33010 .01124 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 1.712 0.456 0.197 0.033 0.01136 0.00344 Contents <0 .3 ?.S <*S-n>J > t> T3 in CO CN 2: -5 co (S3 CD CO o in a: Q CL o c V o I-- 5 CO u. -- o 1/5 in ** aj b < 6 CO F 03 F Ul CL LU Hi DC DO F W 2-i u < cs _ C x-- O E -- c o U o CO o CO F o ^f F co in <o F- F <n O -- CN 00 <0 cO r-- -- r-- CM 00 05 in 00 o CO to m in CO CO F CO ro CO 05 CO F CN C*Nf CN co CN F in to CN CN CO O in 1CO CN oCO co CN --- CO in in CO *- *-- *- *- *-- o o 00 O in o d in d CO F to in in if *-- CD t>i _j c cr F CD 5 U- OOooO ooOoo o co oCO' CoO j dCO d co O) o CD in in CN CD CN co F in CN 00 F tf O CO F CO in od o CO Foo CO to F r-* CO 00 F in 00 to' CO d 00 CCON CO CoO F CN F CO 00 CO CO in F CO CO CN F oF co' F in ro F CD F cn in in 00 " d CCOO <T--d din CCOO CN CN iFf F o<3- *- *" r-- CN 00 F O F CD 0CC0DN rCD FF in 05 cFo cd co FF F cf Oo- OooOO Oqoqo d oj d d o CO o> 05 05 05 in <U CD F in CO 05 in in 3_ OU 5 o o SE- -2S -C H Contents Dustiness test No. 28 Material: Calcium Sterate Soft White Sticky Powder (Repeat of Test 15) Temp: 19.3C: Humidity: 39% All masses in g , Run:1i: T Run 2 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter ' After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust iTeSt-j.: Control 18.683 15.587 16.037 15.591 2.646 -0.002 2.648 13.046 11.862 12.872 11.864 .174 -0.002 0.176 .34544 .33225 .01319 ; Test?. '*!; Control 16.875 15.322 15.811 15.327 1.064 -0.005 1.069 13.244 12.725 13.106 12.730 .138 -0.005 0.143 .34264 .33144 .01120 Run 3 Test Control 16.884 15.541 15.781 15.543 1.103 -0.002 1.104 12.727 12.598 12.331 12.335 .129 -0.004 0.133 .33851 .32711 .01140 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 1.607 0.902 0.151 0.023 0.011 93 0.0011 Contents a c ?i <*->> </l -O CN P' cn 05 fc Vas) W03 E Ea <A 2 3 *p CD 'f O p- TJ in CO in CO PH ga 2-- oi C<TO> IN O' p* o r-- 't DC Q OO -c u to a t cn F in C/) *" to HE LU E < U. o w V) Ui h- CL LU tu 1- < cc o *CO </> CN p- ID to to <r o 0rv1 CN o >r-P CO o- 01 d 00 to o CO in -- r-- o> CO CN p CO CO in P* 'P o CO If rt r-- o < 21 a "S E t/) CO E F < o c o O 0 CQ p O' <N 0- r- pH o P o in CO in tp in 03 i<nP i-- co -- o *P CN 0) in CO cd (n CD Ph in in CO in in in *P o- O) -- to r-- f-* T-- in p CO N CN 01 CO o CO d CO CN O CN in 00 "P O -P cp 1-- <o in in cr <0 Q CN 0) ID in CO* <n CO Ol to tp CO in O PH od in t-- in CN CN CN PH o ID CO CO d cd d to <P in *-- CN in to CO CO CO o CO in 01 ID co' CO ro O CO O <0 CN to to O 01 Ol CO to CO *p pi ID* cd CN *p *P Ip ^p to CO CO CO Ph co CO in to d cd id in CN CD O P* PH to "p c T-- CN CN CN CN *P Ph ID Ph 01 CN in Tp ID 00 o cd cd 01 cd 00 ID 00 PH CN o- P o CN CN CN CN o- in > o o o Oo o g. a o oOoo " a o' d O d o ~ CO to to to < 03 2 Li. oo O O O o O o o o oOdo6 Ol cn 01 01 01 in 6 P cd ro CO O' irn-- CO CO 00 CN d CN CO 3 to O a. E3 Contents Dustiness test No. 29 Material: Calcium Sterate Temp: 19C: Humidity: 54% All masses in g Run 1 Run 2 r Jest Control Test Control After 30 ppi Foam , Before Difference, Mass of dust After 90 ppi' Before Foam Difference Mass of dust After Filter Before ; Mass of dust 17.111 15.591 15.159 15.594 1.952 -0.003 1.955 13.075 12.369 12.877 12.371 .198 -0.002 0.200 .34448 .33317 .01131 16.831 15.637 15.061 15.640 1.770 -0.003 1.773 ,13.19.1 11.902 13.024 11.904 .167 -0.002 0.169 .34277 .33154 .01123 ; Run 3 Test Control 15.837 15.370 14.416 1.421 . 15.376 -0.006 1.427 13.500 12.769 13.295 12.775 .205 -0.006 0.211 .33964 . .32928 0.1036 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 1.718 0.268 0.193 0.022 0.01097 0.00053 Contents 5= o (0 CO 05 to o o 05 * o 09 in 0o5 ro CO 03 eg eg f-- eg eCOg r0-0v deg 'ft M o eg Oi eg <n CO O hj eg eg eg 'T in roo CO CO eo eCoO' in *" eo CO eg Tf d w o> O in CO eg ti -- 05 cd CO eg T*. 10 eg NT <o in <0 in *C--O M- CO 00 in <0 05 'f 05 0> o r~eg v-- CM eg ieng eg CO <re-og- 05 05 O -Cf - *" in 05 cr w- eo 03 eg feg eg eg CeOd1 er--g d rr--. o r-- P5 05 O eo 0--5 cm Oo oo oro d eo OOooO oOooO d o O 05 o05 0o5 d 05 3 ^ J_ *u o a j: E 3 ce - Dustiness test No. 16 Material: 16 Carbon Black Temp: 19.5C: Humidity: 52% All masses in g Run 1 Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 15.153 15.350 14.809 15.350 .344 0 0.344 12.424 12.362 12.414 12.362 .010 0 0.010 .32965 .32841 .00124 Run 2 Test Control 16.286 15.177 16.107 15.176 .179 .001 0180 12.794 12.358 12.792 12.361 .002 -.003 0.005 .33228 .33153 .00075 Run 3 Test Control 16.163 15.626 16.024 15.626 .139 0 0.139 12.301 11.894 12.294 11.896 .007 -.002 0.009 .33318 .33241 .00077 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.221 0.108 0.008 0.003 * 0.00092 0.00028 Contents Dustiness test No. 27 Materia/: Centrimex Fine White Powder (Repeat of Test 14) Temp: 19.3C: Humidity: 38% Alt masses in g Run 1 Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 28.771 15.584 15.879 12.892 15.583 + 0.001 12.891 13.772 11.857 12.491 11.864 1.281 0.007 1.288 .39495 .32865 .06630 Run 2 Test Control 28.583 15.321 15.726 15.320 12.857 + 0.001 12.856 14.025 12.728 12.777 12.728 1.248 0.000 1.248 .41631 .32926 .09705 Run 3 Test Control 28.159 15.545 15.750 12.409 15.550 -0.005 12.414 . 13.927 12.332 12.766 12.334 1.161 -0.002 1.163 .41887 .33364 .08523 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 12.720 0.266 1.206 0.06 0.08286 0.0156 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 33 Material: Carbon Black Temp: 19.5C: , Humidity: '38% All masses in.g. : . = . After 30 ppi Before Foam Difference Mass of dust After Filter Before Difference Mass of dust Run 1 - Run 2 : Test : Control i Test Control 15.817 15.322 15.598 ' .219 15.329 -0.007 0:226 1.366 1.353 1.345 1.352 .021 0.001 0.020 15.314 15.551 14.990 ' 15.551 .324 0 0.324 1.376 1.351 1.350 ' 1.353 .026 0.002 0.028 Run 3 . , ' V Test Control ' Mean value of three runs standard deviation fl 6.472 1 6.200 i .272 15.593 15.596 -0.003 0.275 0.048 ! . 0.275 1.377 1.352 1.353 ! . A .352 .024 `0 0.024 . . `0.004 , " 0.024 ; Contents DC 34527 1830/810 (3) YELLOWISH LIKE FINE GRIT to .a =! <0 tn > T3 <9 to CM TJ CO o g r CO o 5_= m rr u CM CM CM 00 eo CO in ion H-- in 05 d co CO CO a o tf CO cn CO CM *-- oo to r- o CO CO in CD in CM 8 CoO_ CM <0* T-- CM CM CM C0O) CM CM in r v-- <D d CO CO co o CO m co-1 co' in 0) CM CM 0) CM to1 CO co CM CM 00 o O to 6 in CM m j to ion in CD CM <D in Mt * CO in CM in CO CO to in CO co CM CM CM -- u rin in 05 M; C0O) O CM CM cm' *" CO d Q r-> COM r- CO co co 00 co' co w to in r> 00 CM in CO ** fO* <COo in CM in in v 0O3' in otoot- CM CO <0 CO C0D) <0 <o0 om CM 00 CM CM c--o' CM co in CM to CO*O to cn cn oo LT) cn 0) 00 O CM r- CM 05 5 CO in cn CM CO CM in in orcr in d c0oo0- Ct--O in O' 00 CM CM Oo 05 CM dor-- CM dr> CM CM d M1 CM o tr~n. CM M0co5n > w o a g- ao. oo oO oo oo oo dCO o CO o CO ri co d co O O o O oO oo oo o o05 o 05 d05 o 05 32a _oo> ES Ocn O <4- oo d 0) 00 f* f- 05 6 6o 05 00 CO in o in to (O co co co to CO o co CO CO CD o O CM CO co CO CO CO CO MATERIAL 17 Contents Dustiness test No. 17 Material: DC 34527 1830/810 (3) Temp: 19.2C: Humidity: 39% . : .1 ' i All masses in g After , 30 ppi Foam Before Difference Mass of dust After 90 ppi Foam Before Difference Mass of dust After Filter Before Mass of dust . Run 1 Run 2 Test;.,' Control * Test Control 15.674 15.588 15.670 0.004 15.590 ;0.002 0.006 12.545 12.337 12.544 12.340 0.001 -0.003 0.004 .33089 .33010 .00079 16.026 15.322 16.023 0.003 15.325 -0.003 0.006 12.861 11.860 12.860 1 1.867 0.001 -0.007 0.008 .33561 , .33483 .00078 Run 3 ' , Test Control; Mean value of three runs standard deviation 15.599 15.145 15.596 15.149 0.003 '' r0.004 0.0063 0.0006 ; 0.007 12.818 12.725 12.815 . 12.730 ' 0.003 -0.005 0.0065 : 0.0015 * 0.008 ; - - ' .33357 .33263 ' . ; .00094 0.00084 0.00009 Contents S3 .Si ?.f S3 > * V) T> .1 co <0 0) o CO Oj 5 - o 'J^o o S3 O CO 1-- s> O "t* S3 cd oj to so co <0 5 in 00 V oj o in CO < in in in to o CO 03 o in CO in r-- 00 04 n co to O' in CO t CO CM CM CM CO CO to o in <n in 04 CM 04 CO .o O o o 00 o o 03 05 CO 04 r** to f- 03 as to O' 04 in in in in in 031 04 04 0) CM v-- T-- in 03 in oj 03* O' 04 c o 0) to o in in t* c> 04 04 04 *- n o f" 1"* O o CO CM O <* O' O' to 03 CO 00 aj j to in CQ CM O' 'S- in to -- oj in 04 * o Ol 00 O tf < ro in CD in in tf to 03 04 04 <T> f-- 03 o O' 03 o IX) 04 d 03 f" CO O' 00 CO oa 04 in f-- to in in * to > o a" ?a ~ o u. O o o o o o o o o o n6 o d o o M CO CO <0 to to tf co <73 to <o 03 oo` 03 O CO O' CM in 00 o CM CM 04 04 T 't in CO CM CM Oo CD CM o to O o 03 O O' in to O' Of O' o 04 04 04 04 t O o O O O o O o o o rio d o o 0) 0) 0) 03 03 ro 03 r* u. 03 03 m ro (73 CM CM in in a g a a- B tr H m Dustiness test No. 18 Material: DC 34527 1830/810 (4) Temp: 19.3C: Humidity: 43% All masses in g Run 1 Run 2 TeSt ':;- : ' . Control^ Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 15.653 15.597 15.651 0.002 15.601 -0.004 0.006 12.940 12.339 12.942 -0.002 12.346 -0.007 0.005 .33410 .33328 .00082 15.694 15.328 15.693 15.330 0.001 -0.002 0.003 12.906 11.864 12.905 11.869 0.001 -0.005 0.006 .33048 .32955 .00093 Run 3 : Test Control 15.276 15.150 15.267 15.154 0.009 -0.004 0.013 11.499 12.731 11.500 12.737 0.001 -0.006 0.007 .32860 .32779 .00081 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.007 0.005 0.006 0.001 0.00085 0.00007 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 19 Material: Jnterpon - Temp: 19.1C: Humidity: 44% All masses in g Run 1 ; Run 2 Test' Control 4 ..Test- Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 26.631 15.595 15.860 15.603 10.771 -0.008 10.779 13.097 12.337 12.763 12.341 0.334 -0.004 0.338 .34324 .33079 .01245 25.109 15.329 15.183 15.338 9.926 -0.009 9.935 13.043 12.693 11.869 11.870 0.350 -0.001 0.351 .34556 .33153 .01403 Run 3 Test Control 24.992 15.157 16.102 15.158 8.890 -0.0009 8.899 12.821 12.733 12.483 12.738 0.338 -0.005 0.343 0.34356 .33389 0.00967 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 9.871 0.942 0.344 0.007 0.01205 + 0.00221 Contents S ta n d a r d a v ia tio 4 8 4 .8 5 1 4 .7 2 4 .4 9 03 to E c (0 in p- 5 ra 00 o <n q "t *1 d CO d od *-- CN 01 o CO r p- u CO in <0 c in d in' CO CN in CN <71 3 00 ps P* to Oj ci d to d <N CN CN 10 CO CN CO in in (6 to to LO to to pCN o d in in d- d in N in in CN d in m in r* to CO CN 00 co d d- o to CO in in in m to d CN to t-- in N co CO d CN CO do CO in CO t-- oi T-- CO co co <N Ol CO d in p to CN in to' d d co O p- co o o 01 01 CN U1 CARBON BLACK (FINER???) 0 o p 0) <0 o in in d; 01 CN <n CN C0 o o pCO CN O d r*> Pv CO to CO ai co' co d <o in fv CO CN k_ r- d m to *-- in ro' CN ** CN CO in N to in m d <o CN CN o o m o in CN 6 oi o> p- CO CO CD fN in d CO c-- to in in d to > o_____ O- S- E 0 u. ooOOo ooOOo o' d o o d CO CO CO CO ro <o to p* o d co <71 to to 01 00 CO CO O P* CN T-- d- r~> 00 o CN CN CN <N d d d CN O <71 in eo CN q CN d to o o ai o in to P' CN d r o CN CN CN CN d oo O O O ooooO oo odo O) <71 <71 01 a> CO <71 <0 CO 01 in ro <71 CN CN in in d 2 a Q. E3 1- U. MATERIAL 20 Dustiness test No. 20 Material: Carbon Black (Finer) Temp: 19.6C: Humidity: 44% All masses in g g' Run i ^ Run 2 Test, ' Control:-:;. Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Filter Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 28.070 15.605 15.983 12.087 15.604 -0.001 12.088 14.485 12.345 13.931 12.343 0.554 + 0 .002 0.532 .36100 .32829 0.04271 23.036 15.334 15.857 15.343 7.179 -0.009 7.188 13.517 11.876 12.994 11.876 0.523 0.000 0.523 .36307 .32802 0.04505 Run 3 Test Control 24.172 15.165 16.260 15.169' 7.912 -0.004 7.916 13.258 12.741 12.730 12.752 0.528 0.009 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 8.824 2.827 : 0.531 0.018 0.519 .36793 .33156 0.03637 0.04138 ( 0.00449 Contents V .c2 W T3 <T> f- ow o' CM CM m m Lf> CM o CM IT) CM Lf) in in CO CO CO C632. 3_oO Contents Dustiness test No. 21 Materia): Goon Yean Bone (supplied wet) Temp: 18.8C: Humidity: 47% All masses in g Run 1 Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 15.611 15.158 15295 15.171 .316 -0.013 0.329 13.011 12.923 12.736 12.749 .088 -0.013 0.101 .35223 .32710 .02513 Run 2 Test Control 16.012 15.603 15.716 15.613 .296 0.010 0.306 11.603 12.341 11.510 12.351 .093 -0.010 0.103 .35509 .33100 .02409 Run 3 Test Control 15.972 15.337 15.676 15.343 . .296 -0.006 0.302 13.043 11.875 12.967 11.880 .076 -0.005 0.081 .35215 .33178 .02037 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.312 o.oib 0.02520 0.00250 Contents xi e 5 .2 1 .2 <0 > f to T5 CD M CO 'W w E to c 't (0 0) .73 "2 -2 03 o 00 CN CO in si f-* *fr O in o W CN CN o c -- <D cn <o to 03 03 a C0_ : 03 00 * <0 to" O in CO < U3 I-* t r* *T to 03 00 l" in o tn to" to <33 00 00 03 CN CO to" to r* in to U3 O CO <*> CN CN CN 03 CN r-CN r~ (O CN 00 03 to CN CO CO t 03 to to CN in to to to to cn to 03 5 cn CO CO in in to to rl CO CN CN CN to r-- in in r-^ CN to CN to CN to CN CO 'j- CO to CO to cn o r- 03 CN Q CO CO to 00 CN ON CN to op d O 03 in to in r-- in ''t to q cn 03 1; to in CN 00 o to CO CN cn in to t-- to in in 't lO o a * CO _ to <n to to to CO in" CN tl- tr 03 -- r-~ 03 CO CN in to *-- to in in to CO CO 0) CN 00 CO O; q CN 03 to" o CN to" 03 to o 'O' in to CN O' Oj CN CN CN CN to 03 03 tT in CN to CN in d to CN o f* V-- in r-. CN * O CN CN CN CN CO CO to in iZ W o_ S o. E~ CD o oO Ooo co to to CO to OooOo 03 03 03 0) 03 3_ U i? E B cc Contents Dustiness test No. 22 Material: Neph Syenite {supplied wet) Temp: 18.9C: Humidity: 48% All masses in g Run 1 Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 15.783 15.162 15.630 15.172 0.153 -0.010 0.163 12.950 12.742 12.893 0.057 12.750 -0.008 0.065 .35624 .32753 .02871 Run 2 Test Control 15.889 15.612 15.706 15.618 0.183 -0.006 0.189 12.646 12.350 12.577 12.356 0.069 -0.006 0.075 .36394 .33252 .03142 Run 3 Test Control 16.248 15.340 16.060 15.345 0.188 -0.005 0.193 12.928 11.880 12.843 11.875 0.085 + 0.005 0.080 .36299 .32931 .03368 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.181 0.016 0.073 0.008 0.03127 0.00249 Contents Contents Dustiness test No. 23 Material: Ground Flint in Water (supplied wet) Temp: 19.3C: Humidity: 38% All masses in g Run 1 Test Control 30 ppi Foam 90 ppi Foam Filter After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Difference Mass of dust After Before Mass of dust 16.295 15.320 15.900 15.322 0.395 -0.002 0.397 13.111 11.863 12.975 11.867 0.136 -0.004 0.140 .38452 .33040 0.05412 Run 2 Test Control 16.061 15.143 15.700 15.141 0.361 + 0.001 0.362 13.102 12.730 12.965 12.729 0.137 + 0.001 0.136 .38335 .33037 0.05298 Run 3 Test Control 16.481 15.585 16.075 15.585 .406 0 0.406 13.237 12.328 13.104 12.330 .133 -0.002 0.135 .38656 .33234 0.05422 Mean value of three runs standard deviation 0.388 0.023 0.137 0.003 0.05377 0.00069 Contents Appendix F FINAL DETAILED DESIGN DRAWINGS FOR THE PRODUCTION VERSION OF THE NEW DUSTINESS TESTER Contents DRG.No. JS 4000-01 4001-01 4002-01 4003-01 4004-01 4005-01 4006-01 4007-01 4008-01 4009-01 4010-01 4011-01 4012-01 4013-01 4014-01 4015-01 4016-01 4017-01 4018-01 4019-01 4020-01 4021-01 4022-01 4023-01 4024-01 4025-01 PARTS LIST DUSTINESS TEST APPARATUS ASSEMBLY DESCRIPTION DUSTINESS TEST APPARATUS ASSY.-COVERS REMOVED COVER ASSEMBLY BASE FRAME DUST CHAMBER FILTER HOLDER ASSEMBLY-INLET FOAM HOLDER ASSEMBLY-OUTLET OUTLET CONE ASSEMBLY BASE REAR PANEL BASE FRAME ASSEMBLY FOAM HOLDER BASE SIDE PANEL TOP COVER FRONT COVER TOP COVER ASSEMBLY 'O' RING HOUSING OUTLET CONE FOAM DISC-lst STAGE FOAM DISC-2nd STAGE DUST CHAMBER OUTLET ASSEMBLY DUST CHAMBER INLET ASSEMBLY FILTER CASSETTE ASSEMBLY RETAINING RING UNION HOUSING CIRCUIT DIAGRAM PNEUMATICS DIAGRAM Contents Contents ft I Ulivl3l Ko 11 01 m 0 o t J) n 6 Z d Q tf U<fil 2 to < 3e--o o Q u<i b<Dn- Z0 tu<o o- z OQ 0 80 * 8* 1 if} n QS2| gs Contents Contents Contents & I z o t-- < DC LU VD) CO < h- CD. :z>. ;0 Q Z < ouo fo-- Z o Q 0 1 roo- to go QZ O i Ui N. UJ . ll* Ifll O C Tf 62 </)UJ</) Qyj oi.. oc UJ B* 15 ;3i* oa i o cc oQ J 1z1i < Q UI fOO' L t<f <UJ o UJ a <ui0 d U <"f0 m z $< a fO Contents Is ra H to < *-- CD 13 o Q u< to o>-- z 0 Q 0 1 0o0 o if) So QZ 0 ob o 0 "T ui5 OS<oIi?2! 01 -I ot- ZO II o a: Q IQ 2 Lit ifl < UJ 2 < a U Hi in irt < cD o UN- 0 r>l 00 0 in -> i O M <--n) z6 Q 0 ty 7 _] id 0 o zp j? uJ IL UJ <2 0 0 O' <2 in Ll UJ uJ UJ a s (0 tl</f)) N --. 2.*2. *** Contents Contents Contents "tPRo pns Contents | BY DATE [ZO N E A LTE R A TIO N [ ISSUE 0I O 't tnt> O? </) *n ..EC zso O o Z II b O' OO >- (0 I uJ 3in CO <. :Ic--q O Q Z uJ > 8 CL. D. in 0 0 ll- - 7Z L0- do 1 Of 7 n < u to o z O Q Id UJ 2 > 0 I0 < n 0 Eh Z 0 a 5 0 s a - ii Contents Contents 0 1 V9 0 't if) m!? Oj. .of 85 zo o Q id 2 0 u uJ J i-- 3 0 Contents NR0GJS40I7-Of DO NOT SCALE IF IN DOUBT ASK 0 ./> DlA. ',,GJS 40- 18-01 DO NOT SCALE IF IN DOUBT ASK I . If50 r-> t A 1 ISSUE unuss oTMinMH n*j*o BUCKINGHAM HEPRO PDS B83514 1 ALTERATION TITLE Foam disc 2Na stage. AJ PDRAWN oah 5-93icmo^^5c: SCALE 1S2 CAT. REF. DATE BY POLYESTER v tMJSWyRCFO3LO0U/9R0-&BGEIGf9E0PPlf) DRG. No JS4-018-01 Contents DRG. No. J> 4019-01 N O 2 T 4 -> l 50 r- a 00 T 15 u O u rt <A "1 66 zZ ul H & d Of 3 Q0 uJ s V5 CL J *) 0a0 uJ Z 5 2 < 2 < o fi CO -tS /> > zo | A ZI i< V) v) _OI *> 0 1 z ZZ 8 Q $ -c A < P L 5 d K id 3 ti iUl 0 i> 0 7* Ul 0 X X& i 2 < fi 0 U. 0 d Si7i Contents C AT REF. Contents Contents dnoGJ4022.-01! DO NOT SCALE ^3 IF IN DOUBT ASK i\ \ 1 "" 1 11 4'S DIA . EQUt-SPACEO ONJ 50*0 P.C.D, ISSUE BUCK INGHAM R EPRO PDS 863514 ALTERATION TITLE REGAINING R-INIO maW DATE Aluminium he 30 BY alloy DRG. No. JS -4022-01DRAWN A J P SCALE ) if PATE g.^3|cHKD^> Contents >cO- Contents D*GJS4024-O1 DO NOT SCALE ^3 > o 2 IF IN DOUBT ASK ISSUE T<X$: WHOUNw.it) SOfOMAlltOl UNUSSOTHWWHf SUTTD BUCKINGHAM REPRO POS 863514 1 ALTERATION TITLE Circuit Diagram DATE BY DAWW AJF scale -- 1 DATE S?3 \cm0.4Sp-- DRG. No. J5 40Z4-01 Contents Contents HSE BOOKS MAIL ORDER HSE priced and free publications available from: HSE Books POBox 1999 Sudbury Suffolk CO 10 6PS Tel: 0787 881165 Fax: 0787 313995 RETAIL HSE priced publications are available from Dillons Bookstores nationwide and can also be ordered at any branch of Ryman the Stationer or Ryman Computer Store {see Yellow Pages or telephone 071 434 3000 for local details) PUBLIC ENQUIRY POINT Health and safety enquiries: HSE Information Centre Broad Lane Sheffield S3 7HQ Tel: 0742 892345 Fax: 0742 892333 CRR 62 40.00 net ISBN 0-7176-0727-5 9 7 80717 '607273 Contents