Research and development, where people are exposed to nanomaterials

OBJECTIVES: Many nanomaterials (materials with structures smaller than 100 nm) have chemical, physical and bioactive characteristics of interest for novel applications. Considerable research efforts have been launched in this field. This study aimed to study exposure scenarios commonly encountered in research settings. METHODS: We studied one of the leading Swiss universities and first identified all research units dealing with nanomaterials. After a preliminary evaluation of quantities and process types used, a detailed analysis was conducted in units where more than a few micrograms were used per week. RESULTS: In the investigated laboratories, background levels were usually low and in the range of a few thousand particles per cubic centimeter. Powder applications resulted in concentrations of 10,000 to 100,000 particles/cm(3) when measured inside fume hoods, but there were no or mostly minimal increases in the breathing zone of researchers. Mostly low exposures were observed for activities involving liquid applications. However, centrifugation and lyophilization of nanoparticle-containing solutions resulted in high particle number levels (up to 300,000 particles/cm(3)) in work spaces where researchers did not always wear respiratory protection. No significant increases were found for processes involving nanoparticles bound to surfaces, nor were they found in laboratories that were visualizing properties and structure of small amounts of nanomaterials. CONCLUSIONS: Research activities in modern laboratories equipped with control techniques were associated with minimal releases of nanomaterials into the working space. However, the focus should not only be on processes involving nanopowders but should also be on processes involving nanoparticle-containing liquids, especially if the work involves physical agitation, aerosolization or drying of the liquids.

A system to assess the stability of airborne nanoparticle agglomerates under aerodynamic shear

Stability of airborne nanoparticle agglomerates is important for occupational exposure and risk assessment in determining particle size distribution of nanomaterials. In this study, we developed an integrated method to test the stability of aerosols created using different types of nanomaterials. An aerosolization method, that resembles an industrial fluidized bed process, was used to aerosolize dry nanopowders. We produced aerosols with stable particle number concentrations and size distributions, which was important for the characterization of the aerosols' properties. Next, in order to test their potential for deagglomeration, a critical orifice was used to apply a range of shear forces to them. The mean particle size of tested aerosols became smaller, whereas the total number of particles generated grew. The fraction of particles in the lower size range increased, and the fraction in the upper size range decreased. The reproducibility and repeatability of the results were good. Transmission electron microscopy imaging showed that most of the nanoparticles were still agglomerated after passing through the orifice. However, primary particle geometry was very different. These results are encouraging for the use of our system for routine tests of the deagglomeration potential of nanomaterials. Furthermore, the particle concentrations and small quantities of raw materials used suggested that our system might also be able to serve as an alternative method to test dustiness in existing processes.

Dustiness and deagglomeration testing: interlaboratory comparison of systems for nanoparticle powders

Different types of aerosolization and deagglomeration testing systems exist for studying the properties of nanomaterial powders and their aerosols. However, results are dependent on the specific methods used. In order to have well-characterized aerosols, we require a better understanding of how system parameters and testing conditions influence the properties of the aerosols generated. In the present study, four experimental setups delivering different aerosolization energies were used to test the resultant aerosols of two distinct nanomaterials (hydrophobic and hydrophilic TiO2). The reproducibility of results within each system was good. However, the number concentrations and size distributions of the aerosols created varied across the four systems; for number concentrations, e.g., from 10(3) to 10(6) #/cm(3). Moreover, distinct differences were also observed between the two materials with different surface coatings. The article discusses how system characteristics and other pertinent conditions modify the test results. We propose using air velocity as a suitable proxy for estimating energy input levels in aerosolization systems. The information derived from this work will be especially useful for establishing standard operating procedures for testing nanopowders, as well as for estimating their release rates under different energy input conditions, which is relevant for occupational exposure.