CHAPTER 9 SOLUTIONS TO END-OF-CHAPTER EXERCISES
9.1. To
protect the firm from liability for pre-employment health conditions or
pre-existing injuries or damage to tissues, such as lungs.
9.2. The
term "toxic substances" generally refers to agents that cause harm to
the body. Examples would be irritants, systemic poisons, depressants,
asphyxiants, carcinogens, teratogens, and mutagens. "Hazardous
materials" are more likely to be associated with safety hazards, such as
fire and explosion hazards. Admittedly, toxic substances are also hazardous,
but the terminology used by OSHA and practicing professionals is to make the
above-described distinction between the two terms.
9.3. Irritants,
systemic poisons, depressants, asphyxiants, carcinogens, teratogens, and
mutagens.
9.4. Ethyl
alcohol or "ethanol." Its principal hazard is as a depressant.
9.5. Inhalation,
(skin) absorption, and ingestion.
9.6. Dentistry
9.7. For
most toxic substances, OSHA has taken a general approach and has published
"national consensus" PELs, based upon existing TLVs published by the
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). However, for
some substances OSHA has gone much further and written "completed"
standards, each addressing a particular substance. Prominent examples of such
substances are asbestos and lead. Other prominent examples include benzene,
vinyl chloride, cadmium, and arsenic. (See Table 9.1 of the text).
9.8. Odorless
gases include carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrogen. Carbon
monoxide is more dangerous than the others, but the others can be dangers as
simple asphyxiants, crowding out life-giving oxygen. Methane is listed here as
odorless, but usually, for safety reasons, the gas utility company adds a
stanching agent, such as ethyl mercaptan, to make the methane have the
characteristic "natural gas" odor.
9.9. Hydrogen
sulfide, commonly known as "rotten-egg gas." The term
"olfactory" refers to the sense of smell.
9.10.
9.11. "Solid" particles that are
generally too fine to be called dusts.
Fumes are typically formed by the resolidification of vapors from very
hot processes such as welding.
9.12. 0.033% is equivalent to 0.00033 x 106
= 330
The
PELs (TWAs) are found in Appendix A.1:
PELs
(ppm)
Carbon Carbon
Monoxide Dioxide
50
5,000
Ci 330 x
Em
= S -- = ------- + ---- < 1
Li 5000 50
x < 1 - 330
50
5000
x < 9670
50 5000
x < 9670(50)
5000
x
< 96.7 ppm carbon monoxide
9.13. Concentration Length of Time C x Ti
.00001 4 hr .00004
.00015 4 hr .00060
Total 8 hr .00064
S CiTi .00064
E
= --------- = ------- = .00008
8 8
TWA
.00008
= ----
106
TWA
= 80 ppm
The PEL for methyl styrene (from
Appendix A.1) is 100 ppm and is preceded by the letter C, which identifies it
as a "ceiling" concentration, not a TWA. The
9.14. NOTE: This problem has been complicated
by a change in nomenclature as used in the OSHA standards. The organic chemical names
"trifluoromonobromomethane" and "trifluorobromomethane" are
synonyms. OSHA PEL tables have
dropped the "mono" from the name and Appendix A.1 lists the PEL
for
"trifluorobromomethane."
Students should be advised to use this entry in solving this problem.
(a) Concentration Duration
trifluorobromomethane .001 3
hrs
propane .0005 8 hrs
phosgene 1 x 10-6 1/4 hr
TWA
= .001 x 3 (106) = 375 ppm
(trifluorobromomethane)
8
TWA
= .0005(8) (106) = 500 ppm
(propane)
8
TWA
= 1/10-6 x 1/4 (106) = .03125 ppm (phosgene)
8
Em
= S Ci = 375 + 500 + .03125
LI 1000
1000 .1
= .375 + .5 + .3125
Em
= 1.1875
Since
Em > 1, the mixture exceeds the OSHA PEL (and the
(b) The given exposure levels of the trifluorobromomethane and propane
(without any phosgene exposure) already exceed the
1
- [.375 + .5] = .125 allowed for phosgene
Time
of exposure x concentration < .125
8
hrs x PEL (phosgene)
Time
x 1/106 < .125
8 x .1/106
Time
< .125 x 8 hrs x .1
< .1 hr = 6 min
Therefore, to meet the OSHA PEL a
total of 6 minutes exposure of phosgene (at one part per million) is permissible
given the other contaminants. This
represents a decrease in exposure of 9 minutes (15 min. - 6 min. = 9
min.).
9.15. Tube A provides greater precision. Note that Tube A measures a more precise
range (0.5 to 10 ppm) using the same number of pump strokes (5) that for Tube B
will measure a much broader range (5 to 100 ppm). Tube B would be better for gross
concentrations, but for a precise measurement within its range Tube A is
better.
The PEL for nitrogen dioxide can
be found in Appendix A.1 to be 5 ppm. Tube A provides better precision and has
the capability of measuring concentrations both below and above 5 ppm. Tube B would be better for much higher
concentrations.
The AL for nitrogen dioxide is 2.5
ppm (1/2 PEL). Tube A again would be better
for checking concentrations at close to the AL because it is more precise and
its sensing range encompasses 2.5 ppm.
Tube B is barely able to detect concentrations at 2.5 ppm because its
lower detection limit is 2 ppm, using 10 pump strokes.
9.16. CO Iron Oxide Manganese
Conc. Length C x L Conc. Length C x L Conc.
Length C x L
10 2 20 1 2 2 1 2 2
20 2 40 4 2 8 1 2 2
25 1 25 2 1 2 0 1 0
30 3 90 3 3 9 1 3 3
Total 175 Total
21 Total
7
TWA
CO = 175/8 = 21.875 ppm
TWA
CO2 = 1000 ppm
TWA
Iron Oxide = 21/8 = 2.625 mg/m3
TWA
Manganese = 7/8 = .875 mg/m3
Substance PELs from Appen A.1
CO 50 ppm
CO2 5000 ppm
Iron
Oxide 10 mg/m3
Manganese (C)5 mg/m3
Since the PEL for manganese is
shown as a C (Ceiling) concentration, the ceiling observed during the shift
must be used in the Em equivalent mixture calculation. Thus, for the manganese term in the
summation, the ratio is 1/5 for the ceiling concentration, not the TWA ratio of
.875/5.
Em = S Ci = S TWA
Li PEL
= 21.875 + 1000 + 2.625 +
1
50 5000 10 5
= .4375 + .2 + .2625 + .2
Em
= 1.050
Since
Em = 1.050 > 1, the mixture exceeds the PEL.
9.17. Most dangerous: asbestosis, silicosis
Others: siderosis, stannosis,
byssinosis, aluminosis
9.18. Fibrosis is a more serious condition
which includes the development of scar tissue in the lungs.
9.19. Simple asphyxiants: methane, nitrogen,
carbon dioxide
Chemical asphyxiants: carbon
monoxide, hydrogen cyanide
9.20. (a) mutagens--substances that are
harmful to chromosomes (species)
(b) carcinogens--substances that
are know to cause or are suspected to cause cancer
(c) teratogens--substances that
are harmful to the fetus
9.21. At home, ingestion, skin contact, then
inhalation are the order of most frequent occurrences of poisoning. At work, the order is reversed.
9.22. Vapors are gases that come from
substances that are normally in a liquid or solid state. Fumes are solid particles which are too fine
to be considered as dust. Fumes are
usually formed by the resolidification of vapors from very hot processes such
as welding.
9.23. (a) zinc oxide fumes .01 to 0.3 micrometers
(b) tobacco smoke .01 to 0.4 micrometers
(c) diameter of human hair 500 to 700 micrometers
(d) bacteria .2 to 20 micrometers
9.24. (a) TLV--"threshold limit
value": that level of concentration to which the worker could be exposed
during the entire workday without significant harm.
(b) PEL--"permissible
exposure level": prescribed by OSHA or other enforcement agency. Many PELs are numerically the same as the
corresponding TLV.
(c) TWA--"time-weighted
average": exposure level averaged over an 8 hour time period.
(d) MAC--"maximum acceptable
ceiling": PEL should never be exceeded. TWA is not applicable when a MAC is set. Substances for which a MAC applies are
identified by "C" (ceiling) in the OSHA PEL tables.
(e) STEL--"short-term
exposure limit": STEL states a maximum concentration permitted for a
specified duration.
(f) AL--"action level":
usually set at 1/2 of the PEL.
9.25. (1) Smell--convenient but unreliable.
(2) Examining technical literature
to determine what industries might release what substances--good way to find
some agents to check for.
(3) Analyzing the processes in the
plant to determine potential leaks to the atmosphere; this can be very
effective if it is done thoroughly; a chemical engineer may need to be
consulted.
9.26. (1) Direct-reading instruments
(2) Sampling and subsequent
laboratory analysis
(3) Dosimeters
9.27. Methanol is a synonym for methyl
alcohol.
Nitric Sulfur
Total
Period Methanol Oxide Dioxide (Mixture)
Time Ti Ci CiTi Ci CiTi Ci CiTi
8:00-10:00 2 hrs
50 100 5 10 0 0
10:00-11:00 1
hr 150 150 10 10 1 1
11:00-
1:00
2 hrs 100 200 5 10 1 2
1:00- 4:00 3
hrs 200 600 10 30 1 3
Total 8 hrs 1050
60 6
TWA 1050/8 = 131.25 60/8 = 7.5 6/8
= .75
PEL
200 25 5
Ratio
TWA/PEL 131.25/200 = .65625
7.5/25 = .3
.75/5 = .15
1.10625
> 1.0; mixture exceeds the PEL.
(Also
exceeds the AL, of course)
9.28. PEL for ethanol (ethyl alcohol) = 1000
ppm
Since the PEL for ethanol (1000
ppm) is 5 times the PEL for methanol (200 ppm), and the new concentration (of
ethyl alcohol) would be only double the old concentration (of methyl alcohol),
the process change would help to reduce the health hazard. The new concentration would have a smaller
ratio to its PEL and would thus improve matters. The advantage of this improvement could be
shown numerically by recalculating the total equivalent mixture ratio sum. (The result is a reduction from 1.10625 to
0.7125, which is less than 1 and thus within the PEL for mixtures.)
9.29. OSHA recognizes both solvents as
hazards. Chlorobenzene is listed in
Table A.1 as having a PEL (TWA) of 75 ppm.
Benzene is much worse, being recognized as a depressant on the central
nervous system, an irritant, a systemic poison, and a carcinogen (in its role
as a cause of leukemia). In addition,
benzene is a dangerous fire and explosion hazard. So hazardous is benzene that OSHA has issued
a separate standard for it (29 CFR 1910.1029) as a part of the "standards
completion project." In addition it
is listed in Table A.2 as having a PEL (TWA) of 10 ppm. If there are only two choices, and other
factors are equal, chlorobenzene should be selected.
9.30. Volume of room = 600 ft2 x 8
ft = 4800 ft3
5 ft3
Concentration
(initial) = ------- = .001042 = 1042 ppm
4800
ft3
Assuming a steady dilution due to
the open window, the average concentration for the 8-hour all-night period is:
1042
+ 500 1542
--------------- = ------ = 771 ppm
2
2
PEL for ethyl alcohol = 1000 ppm
Since 771 ppm < 1000 ppm. PEL
is not exceeded. (The AL is
exceeded.)
9.31. With the hot oven adding an additional
25 ft3 of alcohol vapor to the room, the total would be 5 ft3
+ 25 ft3 = 30 ft3.
Under these new conditions, six times as much vapor has been introduced
into the apartment's air. If it is
assumed that the initial and average concentrations are also six times as great
as in Exercise 9.30, then:
Concentration initial = 6 x 1042
ppm = 6252 ppm
Average
concentration » 6 x
771 ppm = 4626 ppm
Since
4626 ppm > 1000 ppm, PEL is exceeded.
9.32. Range
Tube 5H Tube
5M
Lower Upper Lower Upper
Percent .05% 8.0% .002% .36%
PPM 500 80000 20 3600
Tube
5M is more sensitive.
9.33. Ceiling (MAC) concentration for
hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is 20 ppm (from Appendix A.2 of the text).
Four tubes in the table encompass
the 20 ppm MAC. They are 4H, 4M, 4L, and
4LL. Tube 4LL covers the narrowest range
(.25 ppm - 60 ppm).
9.34. From Table A.1 of the text, the PEL
(TWA) for isopropyl acetate is 250 ppm.
The AL = 1/2 PEL = 125 ppm
Detector
tube range: 0.05% to 0.75%
converted to ppm:
Detector tube range: 500
ppm to 7500 ppm
The detector tube is of
insufficient sensitivity to be useful as a detector of concentrations near the
PEL or AL.
9.35. 1 micrometer = 10-6 meters;
1 cm = 10-2 meters; 1 cm = 10-4 micrometers
Diameter in centimeters = 17 x 10-4 =
0.0017 cm
Diameter in inches = .0017cm/2.54
cm/in = .00067 in.
The particle would be classified
as dust.
9.36. Contaminant Conc PEL AL
Isopropyl ether 200 500 250
Ethyl
benzene 40 100
50
Chlorobenzene 25 75 37.5
Chlorobromomethane 50 200 100
Taken separately none of the
contaminants exceed either their respective PEL's or AL's. When considered together, however, the
following formula is used for mixtures:
Em
= (200/500) + (40/100) + (25/75) + (50/200)
= .4 + .4 + .33 + .25 = 1.38
Since 1.38 > 1 and 1.38 >
0.5, the concentrations exceed both the PEL and the AL, respectively.
9.37. On the surface it appears that the new
solvent will help matters by reducing the solvent vapor release by 20%. However, 20% is only a modest improvement,
and a more knowledgeable assessment would include a comparison of the PELs for
the two solvents under consideration.
The old solvent, Stoddard solvent, is listed in the OSHA list for air
contaminant PELs as a TWA of 500 ppm (see Appendix A.1). The new solvent, perchloroethylene is listed
in Appendix A.1 with a reference to Appendix A.2. Earlier editions of the
Appendix have recognized "perchloroehtylene" and
"tetrachloroethylene" as synonyms. Tetrachloroethylene is found in
Appendix A.2 to have a TWA PEL of 100 ppm and a MAC of 200 ppm. Therefore perchloroethylene is much more
tightly controlled as a more hazardous substance than Stoddard solvent. The advantage of the modest reduction in
solvent vapors is more than offset by the fact that the new solvent is much
more dangerous, five times as dangerous as indicated by the ratio of PELs. It would be more difficult to control the new
solvent to levels within the PEL and AL.
The consultant should point this out to the process engineer and caution
against making the process change.
9.38. Morning