Unit IV Scholarly Activity

docx

School

Columbia Southern University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

5302

Subject

Chemistry

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

7

Uploaded by DeanMinkMaster696

Report
Unit IV Scholarly Activity Chemical Hazard and Noise Sampling Results June A. Warren-Pope Columbia Southern University Advanced Industrial Hygiene OSH 6302 Professor William Pate May 24, 2023
2 Chemical Hazard Sampling Results 1. Calculate the exposure concentration in mg/m 3 for the aerosols. a. Manganese Fume (5 ug)/(30 L) = 0.167 ug/L = 0.167 mg/m3 b. Copper Fume (140 ug)/(960 L) = 0.146 ug/L = 0.146 mg/m3 c. Lead Fume (40 ug)/(960 L) = 0.042 ug/L = 0.042 mg/m3 d. Metal Working Fluids (500 ug)(720 L) = 0.694 ug/L = 0.694 mg/m3 2. Calculate the exposure in ppm for the vapors. a. 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene (5 ug)/(48 L) = 0.104 ug/L = 0.104 mg/m3 [(0.104 mg/m3)(24.45 L)]/(120.19) = 0.021 ppm b. Toluene (125 ug)/(48 L) = 2.6 ug/L = 2.6 mg/m3 [(2.6 mg/m3)(24.45 L)]/(92.15) = 0.690 ppm c. Xylene (20 ug)/48 L) = 0.416 ug/L = 0.416 mg/m3 [(0.416 mg/m3)(24.45 L)]/(106.17) = 0.096 ppm 3. Discuss where you think errors might have been introduced into the results. Any sample result is subject to possible errors (Fuller, 2015). Errors could be due to the flow of the air pump or in the laboratory methods used in analysis. The total of errors for a collected sample is called the sampling and analytical error (SAE), which is determined by taking the square root of the pump error squared plus the lab error squared. SAE is usually around 10%. 4. Compare your calculated exposures to one of the OELs in the table in the syllabus. My calculations OEL a. Manganese Fume 0.167 mg/m3 0.1 mg/m3 (ACGIH 8-hour TWA) b. Copper Fume 0.146 mg/m3 0.2 mg/m3 (ACGIH 8-hour TWA) c. Lead Fume 0.042 mg/m3 0.05 mg/m3 (ACGIH 8-hour TWA)
3 d. Metal Working Fluids 0.694 mg/m3 0.5 mg/m3 (NIOSH 10-hour TWA REL) e. 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene 0.021 ppm 25 ppm (ACGIH 8-hour TWA TLV) f. Toluene 0.690 ppm 20 ppm (ACGIH 8-hour TWA TLV) g. Xylene 0.096 ppm 100 ppm (ACGIH 8-hour TWA) 5. Do any of the calculated exposures exceed the OEL you chose? Yes – manganese fume and metal working fluids. 6. Discuss why you chose the OELs you used. I chose the ACGIH and NIOSH OEL’s because they are more stringent than the OSHA OELs. It is safer to expose workers to lower levels of hazardous chemicals and noise. Many of OSHA’s numbers are out of date because the last research done on them was in the 1970’s. The ACGIH and NIOSH OELs are based on more recent scientific research and data. 7. Provide your opinion as to whether the risk associated with each exposure is an acceptable level of risk. The risk associated with the copper fume, lead fume, 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene are acceptable because the amounts that workers are exposed to are lower than the OELs. The risk associated with manganese fume and metal working fluids is too high because the amount of these hazards that workers are exposed to is greater than the OELs. Noise Sampling Results 1. Convert the results from dBA to percent. a. Shipping/Receiving = 78.3 dBA, 8 hours TWA = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) + 90 78.3 -90 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) + (90 – 90) -11.7 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) -11.7/16.61 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)])/16.61
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
4 -0.704 = [log(10)(Dose/100)] 0.198 = Dose/100 (0.198)(100) = (Dose/100)(100) 19.8% = Dose b. Hydraulic Press = 93.0 dBA, 12 hours D = 100(C/T) T = (12)/2 [L-90/5] (93.0-90)/5 = 0.6 2 0.6 = 1.042 12/1.042 = 11.5% c. Metal Working Line = 84 dBA, 12 hours D = 100(C/T) T = (12)/2 [L-90/5] (84.0-90)/5 = -1.2 2 -1.2 = 0.435 12/0.435 = 27.6% d. Robotic Welding = 80.5 dBA, 12 hours D = 100(C/T) T = (12)/2 [L-90/5] (80.5-90)/5 = -1.9 2 -1.9 = 0.268 12/0.268 = 44.8% e. Hand Welding = 81.3 dBA, 12 hours D = 100(C/T)
5 T = (12)/2 [L-90/5] (81.3 -90)/5 = -1.74 2 -1.74 = 0.299 12/0.299 = 40.1% f. Paint Booth = 79.5 dBA, 12 hours D = 100(C/T) T = (12)/2 [L-90/5] (79.5-90)/5 = -2.1 2 -2.1 = 0.233 12/0.233 = 51.5% g. QA/QC Laboratory = 70.0 dBA, 8 hours TWA = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) + 90 70 - 90 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) + (90 – 90) -20 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) -20/16.61 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)])/16.61 -1.20 = [log(10)(Dose/100)] 0.198 = Dose/100 (0.063)(100) = (Dose/100)(100) 6.3% = Dose h. Final Inspection = 73.5 dBA, 8 hours TWA = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) + 90 73.5 - 90 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) + (90 – 90) -16.5 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)]) -16.5/16.61 = (16.61 [log(10)(Dose/100)])/16.61
6 -0.993 = [log(10)(Dose/100)] 0.101 = Dose/100 (0.101)(100) = (Dose/100)(100) 10.1% = Dose 2. Which of the results exceeds the OSHA PEL? According to the Hearing Conservation Amendment, the OSHA permissible noise exposure limit is a daily exposure average of 80 dBA for an 8-hour workday (Fuller, 2015). OSHA allows a dBA exchange rate of 5 dB for every 4 hours of exposure. The noise levels in the hydraulic press, metal working line, robotic welding, hand welding, and paint booth areas exceed the OSHA PEL. 3. Which of the results exceeds the OSHA action level? The noise levels in the hydraulic press, metal working line, robotic welding, hand welding, and paint booth areas exceed the OSHA action level. 4. Provide your opinion as to whether the risk associated with each exposure is an acceptable level of risk. The noise levels in the shipping/receiving, robotic welding, QA/QC laboratory and final inspection are at an acceptable level of risk. The noise levels in the hydraulic press, metal working line, robotic welding, hand welding, and paint booth areas are too high and are not at an acceptable level of risk.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
7 References Fleeger, A. K., Lillquist, D. R., & American Industrial Hygiene Association. (2011). Industrial hygiene reference & study guide . AIHA. Retrieved from https://viewer-ebscohost- com.libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/EbscoViewerService/ebook?an=1491632& Fuller, T. P. (2015). Essentials of industrial hygiene . Itasca, IL: National Safety Council.