4.5 Article

Occupational exposure during handling and loading of halloysite nanotubes - A case study of counting nanofibers

Journal

NANOIMPACT
Volume 10, Issue -, Pages 153-160

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.impact.2018.04.003

Keywords

Halloysite nanotubes; Inhalation exposure; High aspect ratio nanomaterial (HARN); Nanofiber counting; Occupational exposure limit

Funding

  1. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [720815]
  2. H2020 Societal Challenges Programme [720815] Funding Source: H2020 Societal Challenges Programme

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Halloysite nanotubes (HNTs) are abundant naturally-occurring hollow aluminosilicate clay mineral fibers with a typical diameter < 100 nm and an aspect ratio of up to 200. Here we assessed the potential inhalation exposure to HNTs in an industrial research laboratory. Inside a fume hood, ten times 100 g of HNTs were poured at rate of 0.5 kg min(-1), which increased concentrations from the background level up to 2900 cm(-3) and 6.4 mu m(2) cm(-3). Inside the fume hood, the respirable mass concentration was 143 mu g m(-3) including background particles. Outside the fume hood we did not measure elevated concentrations. We classified 1895 particles according to their length and aspect ratio. Five particles were in aspect ratio > 3 and in length > 2 mu m. These particles were agglomerated and/or aggregated particles where the longest individual fiber was 2 mu m in length. The occupational exposure limits for refractory mineral fibers vary from 0.1 to 2 fibers cm(-3). Following standard protocols for fiber analysis, detection of 0.1 fibers cm(-3) would require analysis on 4x10(4) images when the filter loading is good. Thus, the fiber sampling and quantification procedures needs to be improved significantly if nanofibers < 100 nm in diameter are included in regulatory exposure assessment. Due to very limited toxicological information of HNTs we recommend avoiding inhalation exposure.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available