以耐火磚廠採樣結果探討不同氣膠採樣器性能之研究

A Study on the Performance of Different Aerosol Samplers in a Refractory Brick Manufacturing Plant

本研究主要利用耐火磚製造廠混合區的現場採樣資料，應用氣膠吸入效率預測模式的推估，以探討採樣器吸入效率對粒徑分布採樣結果之影響。研究結果發現採樣場所內各個採樣點利用Andersen 分徑採樣器所獲得之粒徑分布，其MMAD 與σg 再分別經由multisample median test 及Bartlett’s test 檢定後發現均無統計上之顯著差異。該作業場所之粒徑分布平均值 （Andersendis），可以用MMAD為16.25μm、及σg 為2.75 描述之。依前述粒徑分布再經以吸入效率模式推估，可發現環境中實際存在總氣膠 （True totaldis）、IOM 個人可吸入性氣膠 （IOMdis）、以及37-mm 個人濾紙採樣之“總氣膠”（37-mmdis），其MMAD 分別為26.72，15.14，以及12.25μm，而σg 則為3.52，2.68，及2.56。由上可知Andersendis 與IOMdis較類似，究其原因應與IOM 採樣系統與Andersen 較類似所致。另由於True totaldis及37-mmdis 均與Andersendis 不同，故可知Andersen 分徑採樣器所獲得之粒徑分布並無法代表環境中實際存在總氣膠、以及37-mm 個人濾紙採樣之“總氣膠”。另本研究亦發現IOM 及37-mm 採樣結果之比值，與模式推估結果之比值分別為2.68 及1.54，前述差異可能因勞工在現場作業時，並不是與風向夾角呈角度方向平均的狀態所致。

In this study, sampling results obtained from the mixing area of a refractory brick manufacturing plant are used to evaluate the effect of aspiration efficiencies of aerosol samplers on the size distribution sampling results via the application of aspiration efficiency predictive models. Results show that no significant difference is found in particle size distributions obtained from different areas of the studied workplace by using the Adnersen cascade impacctor, as we examine the differences among mass median aerodynamic diameters (MMAD) and geometric standard deviations (σg) of above collected particle size distributions by using the multisample median test and Bartlett’s test, respectively. The MMAD andσg of the averaged Andersen collected size distribution (Andersendis) of the studied workplace can be described as 16.25μm and 2.75, respectively. By using aspiration efficiency predictive models, the averaged Andersen collected size distribution is further converted into the size distributions of “true total aerosol” of the workplace atmosphere (True totaldis), IOM inhalable sampler collected aerosols (IOMdis), and 37-mm filter cassette collected aerosols (37mmdis), where values of MMAD are 26.72, 15.14 and 12.25μm, andσg are 3.52, 2.68 and 2.56, respectively. Here, similar size distributions found between IOMdis and Andersendis might be due to similar dimensions of aerosol samplers and sampling flow rates are involved in both sampling systems. On the other hand, both size distributions of True totaldis and 37-mmdis are found different from the size distribution of Andersendis, which indicates that Andersen collected size distribution is not representative to both size distributions of the sampled workplace and that collected by 37-mm filter cassette. This study also shows that the ratio of the IOM sampler collected amounts versus 37-mm cassette collected amounts for both field sampling results and model predicted results are 2.68 and 1.54, respectively. The discrepancy as shown above is considered due to the orientations of sampled workers with respect to the wind might not be orientation-averaged.