{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021092669432918397, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006224066390041493, 'mean_word_length': 5.129237288135593, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of pressure drop and filtration efficiency of particulate respirators using welding fumes and sodium chloride.

Respirators are used to help reduce exposure to a variety of contaminants in workplaces. Test aerosols used for certification of particulate respirators (PRs) include sodium chloride (NaCl), dioctyl phthalate, and paraffin oil. These aerosols are generally assumed to be worst case surrogates for aerosols found in the workplace. No data have been published to date on the performance of PRs with welding fumes, a hazardous aerosol that exists in real workplace settings. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of respirators and filters against a NaCl aerosol and a welding fume aerosol and determine whether or not a correlation between the two could be made. Fifteen commercial PRs and filters (seven filtering facepiece, two replaceable single-type filters, and six replaceable dual-type filters) were chosen for investigation. Four of the filtering facepiece respirators, one of the single-type filters, and all of the dual-type filters contained carbon to help reduce exposure to ozone and other vapors generated during the welding process. For the NaCl test, a modified National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health protocol was adopted for use with the TSI Model 8130 automated filter tester. For the welding fume test, welding fumes from mild steel flux-cored arcs were generated and measured with a SIBATA filter tester (AP-634A, Japan) and a manometer in the upstream and downstream sections of the test chamber. Size distributions of the two aerosols were measured using a scanning mobility particle sizer. Penetration and pressure drop were measured over a period of aerosol loading onto the respirator or filter. Photos and scanning electron microscope images of clean and exposed respirators were taken. The count median diameter (CMD) and mass median diameter (MMD) for the NaCl aerosol were smaller than the welding fumes (CMD: 74 versus 216 nm; MMD: 198 versus 528 nm, respectively). Initial penetration and peak penetration were higher with the NaCl aerosol. However, pressure drop increased much more rapidly in the welding fume test than the NaCl aerosol test. The data and images clearly show differences in performance trends between respirator models. Therefore, general correlations between NaCl and weld fume data could not be made. These findings suggest that respirators certified with a surrogate test aerosol such as NaCl are appropriate for filtering welding fume (based on penetration). However, some respirators may have a more rapid increase in pressure drop from the welding fume accumulating on the filter. Therefore, welders will need to choose which models are easier to breathe through for the duration of their use and replace respirators or filters according to the user instructions and local regulations.