Evaluation of airborne particle emissions from commercial products containing carbon nanotubes
Source abstract
Abstract
The emission of the airborne particles from epoxy resin test sticks with different CNT loadings and two commercial products were characterized while sanding with three grit sizes and three disc sander speeds. The total number concentrations, respirable mass concentrations, and particle size number/mass distributions of the emitted particles were measured using a condensation particle counter, an optical particle counter, and a scanning mobility particle sizer. The emitted particles were sampled on a polycarbonate filter and analyzed using electron microscopy. The highest number concentrations (arithmetic mean = 4670 particles/cm(3)) were produced with coarse sandpaper, 2% (by weight) CNT test sticks and medium disc sander speed, whereas the lowest number concentrations (arithmetic mean = 92 particles/cm(3)) were produced with medium sandpaper, 2% CNT test sticks and slow disc sander speed. Respirable mass concentrations were highest (arithmetic mean = 1.01 mg/m(3)) for fine sandpaper, 2% CNT test sticks and medium disc sander speed and lowest (arithmetic mean = 0.20 mg/m(3)) for medium sandpaper, 0% CNT test sticks and medium disc sander speed. For CNT-epoxy samples, airborne particles were primarily micrometer-sized epoxy cores with CNT protrusions. No free CNTs were observed in airborne samples, except for tests conducted with 4% CNT epoxy. The number concentration, mass concentration, and size distribution of airborne particles generated when products containing CNTs are sanded depends on the conditions of sanding and the characteristics of the material being sanded.
Source: europepmc · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Smart Materials for Construction · Air Quality and Health Impacts · Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. ACGIH® (2011) TLVs and BEIs. ACGIH, Cincinnati
2. Ajayan PA, Zhou OZ (2001) Applications of carbon nanotubes. Top Appl Phys 80:391–42510.1007/3-540-39947-X_14 ↗
3. Bello D, Wardle BL, Yamamoto N, deVilloria RG, Garcia EJ, Hart AJ, Ahn K, Ellenbecker MJ, Hallock M (2009) Exposure to nanoscale particles and fibers during machining of hybrid advanced composites containing carbon nanotubes. J Nanopart Res 11(1):231–24910.1007/s11051-008-9499-4 ↗
4. Cena LG, Peters TM (2011) Characterization and control of airborne particles emitted during production of epoxy/carbon nanotube nanocomposites. J Occup Environ Hyg 8:86–9210.1080/15459624.2011.545943 ↗
5. Chung KYK, Cuthbert RJ, Revell GS, Wassel SG, Summers N (2000) A study on dust emission, particle size distribution and formaldehyde concentration during machining of medium density fibreboard. Ann Occup Hyg 44:455–46610.1093/annhyg/44.6.455 ↗
6. Göhler D, Stintz M, Hillemann L, Vorbau M (2010) Characterization of nanoparticle release from surface coatings by the simulation of a sanding process. Ann Occup Hyg 54:615–62410.1093/annhyg/meq053 ↗
7. Golanski L, Guiot A, Braganza D, Tardif F (2010) New method for the characterization of abrasion-induced nanoparticle release into air from nanomaterials. NSTI Nanotechnol 1:720–723
8. Golanski L, Guiot A, Pras M, Tardif F (2012) Release-ability of nano fillers from different nanomaterials (toward the acceptability of nanoproduct). J Nanopart Res 14:96210.1007/s11051-012-0962-x ↗
9. Guiot A, Golanski L, Tardif F (2009) Measurement of nanoparticle removal by abrasion. J Phys Conf Ser 170:01201410.1088/1742-6596/170/1/012014 ↗
10. Hsu LY, Chein HM (2007) Evaluation of nanoparticle emission for TiO2 nanopowder coating materials. J Nanopart Res 9:157–16310.1007/s11051-006-9185-3 ↗
11. Koponen IK, Jensen KA, Schneider T (2009) Sanding dust from nanoparticle-containing paints: physical characterization. J Phys Conf Ser 151:1–910.1088/1742-6596/151/1/012048 ↗
12. Koponen IK, Jensen KA, Schneider T (2011) Comparison of dust released from sanding conventional and nanoparticle-doped wall and wood coatings. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 21:408–41810.1038/jes.2010.32 ↗
13. Kuhlbusch T, Asbach C, Fissan H, Göhler D, Stintz M (2011) Nanoparticle exposure at nanotechnology workplaces: a review. Part Fibre Toxicol 8:1–1810.1186/1743-8977-8-1 ↗
14. Lewinski N, Colvin V, Drezek R (2008) Cytotoxicity of nanoparticles. Small 4:26–4910.1002/smll.200700595 ↗
15. Ma-Hock L, Treumann S, Strauss V, Brill S, Luizi F, Mertler M et al (2009) Inhalation toxicity of multiwall carbon nanotubes in rats exposed for 3 months. Toxicol Sci 112:468–48110.1093/toxsci/kfp146 ↗
16. Muller J, Huaux F, Moreau N, Misson P, Heilier JF, Delos M et al (2005) Respiratory toxicity of multi-wall carbon nanotubes. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 207:221–23110.1016/j.taap.2005.01.008 ↗
17. Muller J, Huaux F, Fonseca A, Nagy JB, Moreau N, Delos M et al (2008) Structural defects play a major role in the acute lung toxicity of multiwall carbon nanotubes: toxicological aspects. Chem Res Toxicol 21:1698–170510.1021/tx800101p ↗
18. OSHA (2011) Table Z-1 limits for air contaminants (29 CFR 1910.1000 Z-1 Table)
19. Peters TM, Heitbrink WA, Evans DE, Slavin TJ, Maynard AD (2006) The mapping of fine and ultrafine particle concentrations in engine machining and assembly plant. Ann Occup Hyg 50:249–25710.1093/annhyg/mei061 ↗
20. Raynor PC, Cebula JI, Spangenberger JS, Olson BA, Dasch JM, D′Arcy JB (2012) Assessing potential nanoparticle release during nanocomposite shredding using direct-reading instruments. J Occup Environ Hyg 9:1–1310.1080/15459624.2012.633061 ↗
21. Sargent LM, Hubbs AF, Young SH, Kashon ML, Dinu CZ, Salisbury JL et al (2011) Single-walled carbon nanotube-induced mitotic disruption. Mutat Res 745:28–3710.1016/j.mrgentox.2011.11.017 ↗
22. Schlagenhauf L, Chu B, Buha J, Nüesch FA, Wang J (2012) Release of carbon nanotubes from an epoxybased nanocomposite during an abrasion process. Environ Sci Technol 46(13):7366–737210.1021/es300320y ↗
23. Shatkin JA (2008) Nanotechnology health and environmental risks. Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton10.1201/9781420053647 ↗
24. Shvedova AA, Kisin ER, Mercer R, Murray AR, Johnson VJ, Potapovich AI et al (2005) Unusual inflammatory and fibrogenic pulmonary responses to single-walled carbon nanotubes in mice. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 289:698–70810.1152/ajplung.00084.2005 ↗
25. Shvedova AA, Kisin ER, Murray AR, Gorelik O, Arepalli S, Castranova V et al (2007) Vitamin E deficiency enhances pulmonary inflammatory response and oxidative stress induced by single-walled carbon nanotubes in C57BL/6 mice. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 221:339–34810.1016/j.taap.2007.03.018 ↗
26. Shvedova AA, Kisin E, Murray AR, Johnson VJ, Gorelik O, Arepalli S et al (2008) Inhalation vs. aspiration of single-walled carbon nanotubes in C57BL/6 mice: inflammation, fibrosis, oxidative stress, and mutagenesis. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 295:552–56510.1152/ajplung.90287.2008 ↗
27. Song YS, Youn JR (2005) Influence of dispersion states of carbon nanotubes on physical properties of epoxy nanocomposites. Carbon 43:1378–138510.1016/j.carbon.2005.01.007 ↗
28. The Food and Environment Research Agency (FERA) (2009) Nanolifecycle—a lifecycle assessment study of the route and extent of human exposure via inhalation for commercially available products and applications containing carbon nanotubes. York: Chaudhry Q, Aitken R, Hankin S, Donaldson K, Olsen S, Boxall A, Kinloch I, Friedrichs S
29. Vorbau M, Hillemann L, Stintz M (2009) Method for the characterization of the abrasion induced nanoparticle release into air from surface coatings. Aerosol Sci 40:209–21710.1016/j.jaerosci.2008.10.006 ↗
30. Wohlleben W, Brill S, Meier MW, Mertler M, Cox G, Hirth S et al (2011) On the lifecycle of nanocomposites: comparing released fragments and their in vivo hazards from three release mechanisms and four nanocomposites. Small 7:2384–239510.1002/smll.201002054 ↗