Robotic direct reading device with spatial, temporal, and PID sensors for laboratory VOC exposure assessment

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 717-726
Author(s):  
Kenneth K. Brown ◽  
Amie E. Norton ◽  
Dylan T. Neu ◽  
Peter B. Shaw
Sensors ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 3089 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Borghi ◽  
Andrea Spinazzè ◽  
Davide Campagnolo ◽  
Sabrina Rovelli ◽  
Andrea Cattaneo ◽  
...  

The aim of this study was to evaluate the precision, accuracy, practicality, and potential uses of a PM2.5 miniaturized monitor (MM) in exposure assessment. These monitors (AirBeam, HabitatMap) were compared with the widely used direct-reading particulate matter monitors and a gravimetric reference method for PM2.5. Instruments were tested during 20 monitoring sessions that were subdivided in two different seasons to evaluate the performance of sensors across various environmental and meteorological conditions. Measurements were performed at an urban background site in Como, Italy. To evaluate the performance of the instruments, different analyses were conducted on 8-h averaged PM2.5 concentrations for comparison between direct-reading monitors and the gravimetric method, and minute-averaged data for comparison between the direct-reading instruments. A linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate whether the two measurement methods, when compared, could be considered comparable and/or mutually predictive. Further, Bland-Altman plots were used to determine whether the methods were characterized by specific biases. Finally, the correlations between the error associated with the direct-reading instruments and the meteorological parameters acquired at the sampling point were investigated. Principal results show a moderate degree of agreement between MMs and the reference method and a bias that increased with an increase in PM2.5 concentrations.


Sigurnost ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-180
Author(s):  
Giulio Arcangeli ◽  
Stefano Dugheri ◽  
Nicola Mucci ◽  
Daniela Massi ◽  
Lucia Trevisani ◽  
...  

This review is directed at preventive health professionals, anatomic pathologists and technicians to focus their attention on the rapidly growing field of safe formalin practices. An updated overview of the most recent improvements in preventive measures versus formaldehyde (FA) in the anatomic pathology laboratories (APL) is provided. The occupational hygienist role and the required knowledge for a modern and clear occupational exposure assessment are described. Real-time, in-continuous, commercial analyzers for repeated FA exposure assessment are considered to evaluate technical changes in air monitoring programs, introduced to mitigate FA emissions, in compliance with the adopted limit values. To better choose the adequate instrumentation, the main features of each FA monitoring instrument recently introduced on the market are listed. Moreover, the main features of the modern workflow setting in APL are summarized. A computer-based scientific and non-scientific reports search by key-words was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Google Patents databases, querying the following topics: i) grossing workstation for ergonomic layout, ii) commercially available direct reading tools to measure formalin, iii) real-time, in-continuous FA monitoring instruments for sale. This review represents a useful tool to summarize the technical requirements and expert know-how necessary to minimize FA emissions and produce an exhaustive FA assessment in the APL.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document