Evaluation of IOM Personal Sampler at Different Flow Rates
Evaluation of IOM Personal Sampler at Different Flow Rates
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/15459620903418746
复制
发表时间：
2010-01-01
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Cheng, Yung-Sung
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Zhou, Yue;Cheng, Yung-Sung
职业医学研究所个人采样器通常以2 L/分钟的流速运行，这是其设计和校准的速率，用于采集职业环境中空气颗粒物的可吸入质量分数。在气溶胶浓度低的环境中，只收集了少量的物质，这可能不足以进行分析。最近，一种新的采样泵问世，流量高达15 L/分钟，可用于个人采样器，具有在更高流量下工作的潜力。对利兰Legacy大流量取样泵的流量进行了评价和标定，其最大流量为10.6Min L。将IOM采样器放置在人体模型上，在大型气溶胶风洞中以0.56m/S和2.22m/100m/s的风速进行采样，使用了尺寸为2~100um的荧光素钠标记的油酸单分散气雾剂。IOM采样器的流速分别为2.0和10.6 L/min。结果表明，无论风速和流速如何，安装在人体模型前部的IOM采样器的采样效率都高于安装在人体侧面和背面的采样器。在风速为0.56m/S时，L/分钟采样器的平均采样效率略高于L/分钟采样器的采样效率。在风速为2.22m/S的情况下，两种流速下颗粒物的采样效率相似
The Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM) personal sampler is usually operated at a flow rate of 2.0 L/min, the rate at which it was designed and calibrated, for sampling the inhalable mass fraction of airborne particles in occupational environments. In an environment of low aerosol concentrations only small amounts of material are collected, and that may not be sufficient for analysis. Recently, a new sampling pump with a flow rate up to 15 L/min became available for personal samplers, with the potential of operating at higher flow rates. The flow rate of a Leland Legacy sampling pump, which operates at high flow rates, was evaluated and calibrated, and its maximum flow was found to be 10.6 L/min. IOM samplers were placed on a mannequin, and sampling was conducted in a large aerosol wind tunnel at wind speeds of 0.56 and 2.22 m/s. Monodisperse aerosols of oleic acid tagged with sodium fluorescein in the size range of 2 to 100 mu m were used in the test. The IOM samplers were operated at flow rates of 2.0 and 10.6 L/min. Results showed that the IOM samplers mounted in the front of the mannequin had a higher sampling efficiency than those mounted at the side and back, regardless of the wind speed and flow rate. For the wind speed of 0.56 m/s, the direction-averaged (the average value of all orientations facing the wind direction) sampling efficiency of the samplers operated at 2.0 L/min was slightly higher than that of 10.6 L/min. For the wind speed of 2.22 m/s, the sampling efficiencies at both flow rates were similar for particles