See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320834808

Coal dust exposure reduction using water mist

system: A case study

Article in Journal of Chemical Health and Safety · November 2017

DOI: 10.1016/j.jchas.2017.10.003

CITATIONS READS

0 3

2 authors, including:

Manikandan Hareendran
Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani
6 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Study on surface errors in machining of thin-walled geometries View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Manikandan Hareendran on 04 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 JCHAS 956 1–5

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Q1
Coal dust exposure reduction
using water mist system:
A case study
Quantification of airborne dust exposure is an essential step in eliminating lung diseases caused by
overexposure to dust. A large number of workers employed in coal boilers are potentially exposed to
significant amount of airborne coal dust during the work period. The objective of the study was to assess the
efficiency of water mist system in reducing airborne coal dust concentration in the working atmosphere near
a coal fired boiler. Samples from eight workers were taken, representing approximately 80% of the total
workforce involved in the coal handling operations. Exposure monitoring was conducted for 480 min during
regular working hours. A personal dust sampler was used to capture the airborne coal dust (PM5) before and
after installation of water mist system. After quantification and comparison, it was observed that the water
mist system successfully reduced up to 81% of airborne dust from the worker’s breathing zone. Further, the
airborne dust concentration was reduced from 7.17 to 1.26 mg/m3 which is significantly below ACGIH
recommended Threshold limit value (TLV) of 2 mg/m3. The same technology may be used in comparable
work environments to reduce high airborne dust levels.

Q2 By K.A. Vivek,
Manikandan Hareendran
INTRODUCTION
The health of workers in many indus-
tries are at risk through exposure by
inhalation of dust which may contain
toxic metal, crystalline silica or other
toxic organic and inorganic chemicals.
Regulatory agencies in industrialized
countries lay great emphasis on moni-
toring of such exposure. In India, The
Factories Act as amended in 1987
(Section 7-A (e) and 41-F) places the
responsibility on factory management
to ensure that the worker’s health
should not be jeopardized as a result
of the work they perform. An occu-
pational health and industrial hygiene
program allows one to respond effec-
tively to workplace injuries and
illnesses and to monitor potential
health problems. A workplace hazard
Q8 K.A. Vivek is affiliated with Dr Reddy’s
Laboratories, Hyderabad, India.
Manikandan Hareendran is affiliated
with Research Scholar, Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Birla Insti-
tute of Technology and Science Pilani,
India.
analysis is the first step that helps to
determine the sources of potential
exposure and quantification of risk
involved which can arise during nor-
mal operation. After identifying
hazards, the control procedures may
include the substitution of harmful or
toxic materials with less dangerous
ones, changing of work processes to
eliminate or minimize work exposure,
installation of exhaust ventilation sys-
tems, good housekeeping (including
appropriate waste disposal methods),
and the provision of proper personal
protective equipment.1
Regulations require regular monitor-
ing of the working environment in a
factory to ensure the chemicals and
pollutants are within prescribed limit.
Since a worker does not stay at point of
high concentration for all the 8 hours
of his duty time, the most practical way
to monitor the risk is through quanti-
tative industrial hygiene study using
‘Personal Sampler’ carried on the
exposed worker’s body and sampling
the air from his actual breathing zone,
wherever he moves to. There are many
different methods of taking air sam-
ples, but by far the most widely used
and preferred method is to connect a
battery-operated pump to a filter
medium. The pump should be capable
of drawing air through the filter at a
constant rate for a time in excess of
8 hours, even in adverse conditions
such as extreme cold. This criterion
is based on the recommendations that
samples should be taken on a personal
basis for an 8-hours Time Weighted
Average (TWA).
Dust as Health Issue for Workers
Dust is defined as “Small, dry, solid
particles projected into the air by nat-
ural forces, such as wind, volcanic
eruption, and by mechanical or man-
made processes such as crushing,
grinding, milling, drilling, demolition, Q3
shoveling, conveying, screening, bag-
ging, and sweeping”.2 Dust particles
are usually in the size range from
about 1 to 100 mm in diameter, divi-
ded into three fractions (i) respirable
(D50 = 4 mm size) (ii) thoracic
(D50 = 10 mm size) and (iii) inhalable
(D50 = 100 mm size). ACGIH has a
Threshold limit value (TLV) of 2 mg/
m3 for the respirable dust fraction of
coal dust containing less than 5%
quartz. Lung parenchyma, lymph
nodes and hila can be affected due to
chronic exposure to coal dust. The
onset of disease is directly related to
the airborne concentration of coal dust
in the working environment and the
total duration of exposure. Currently,
the exposure reduction is based on

1871-5532 ã 2017 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Division of Chemical Health and Safety of the American Chemical 1
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchas.2017.10.003 Society.

Please cite this article in press as: K.A., V., and Hareendran, M1., Coal dust exposure reduction using water mist system: A case study. J.
Chem. Health Safety (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchas.2017.10.003
 JCHAS 956 1–5

administrative control and the use of boiler operation are unloading of coal, Personal Sampler
respiratory protection during specific shoveling of coal, collection of ash and The personal sampler shown in Figures 1
work tasks.3 So far, non-engineering programmable logic controller (PLC) and 2 clearly depicts various parts of
studies concerning airborne dust expo- operations. The study was conducted APM 801 (Envirotech) which was used
sures have mainly focused on educa- on 80% of the total population for the study. A cyclone head holding
tion to promote respiratory health engaged in unloading and shoveling filter is to be worn on the collar/lapel
through an increased and proper use of coal. Water mist system was chosen to draw air from the breathing zone of
of respirators.4–8 The need for effective as the engineering control, Nominal the subject. The PM5 cyclone has been
exposure control strategies for workers cost and ease of installation favored designed to cutoff at 5 m (50% cut
is well acknowledged, but efforts have the selection. The subjects selected aerodynamic diameter-inlet: 100 mm,
been historically challenging mainly for the study were exclusively engaged Stage 1: 5 mm) as recommended
due to intermittent nature of the per- in various activities in boiler opera- by Directorate General of Mines
formed work.8,9 The interest in direct tions for more than five years. Safety, India (DGMS). Air leaving
exposure reduction through engineer-
ing control has been limited. Though,
use of respirators is considered a low-
tier exposure control technique, it acts
as a resort in cases where exposure
control by other methods are not fea-
sible or until other effective engineer-
ing and administrative methods are
established.10,11 The research work
furnished in this paper evaluates the
effectiveness of water mist system as an
engineering control on reducing work-
place respirable coal dust exposure
during coal handling in a pulverized
coal boiler environment.

Figure 1. Personal sampler (Envirotech-APM 801).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Objective
A number of research on particulate
matter (PM) emissions from heavy
industries (Steel, Cement, Fertilizers
etc.) their chemical characterization
and impact assessment have been con-
ducted in the past but boilers have
never been a subject for such investi-
gations.12–16 The specific objective was
to assess the respirable coal dust i.e.,
PM5 exposure before and after instal-
lation of water mist system in a boiler
environment and to ascertain the effi-
ciency of engineering control over
other methods on exposure control.

Design of Study

Sampling sites
Q4 The site preferred for the study was the
working premises of a pulverized coal
boiler. When coal is pulverized into
fine powders using mechanical ham-
mers, the coal powder will burn as
efficiently as a combustible gas inside
a coal boiler. The major activities in a Figure 2. PM5 cyclone.

2 Journal of Chemical Health & Safety, May/June 2017

Please cite this article in press as: K.A., V., and Hareendran, M1., Coal dust exposure reduction using water mist system: A case study. J.
Chem. Health Safety (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchas.2017.10.003
 JCHAS 956 1–5

the cyclone has particle size of 5 mm and spaced 0.5 m apart at a height of collected from the selected subjects,
or less accumulate on a glass microfi- 3 m. The water mist system was con- 40 samples each were collected before
ber filter of 37 mm diameter housed in tinuously functioning during the and after the installation of engineer-
leak proof Teflon filter holder, fitted at course of sampling. The water mist ing control. Measured respirable dust
the bottom of the cyclone. Sampler system increased the overall humidity concentrations varied significantly
was mounted near the breathing zone at the study site, without affecting the after the installation of water mist sys-
of worker. The worker was then comfort level of the subjects. tem at workplace. The total dust con-
allowed to perform his work for centration after the modification var-
8 hours. The accumulated coal dust Statistical Analysis ied from 1.26 to 1.70 mg/m3 compared
on the filter was quantified gravimet- Exposure data are presented as to that of 5.83 to 7.17 mg/m3 (Table 1)
rically. To determine the mass con- median, geometric mean (GM), arith- before the modification which is con-
centration of the size fractions, the metic mean (AM) and range. The sim- siderably lower than ACGIH TLV lim-
Particle Sampler filters were post- ple t-test for paired samples was used its. The result of the modification is
weighed on the same digital micro- to evaluate differences between Respi- summarized in Table 2. The two-tailed
Q5 balance as was used to pre-weighed rable Coal Dust Concentration before p value is less than 0.0001 (Table 3). By
the filters. The filters were weighed and after installation of Water Mist conventional criteria, this difference is
before and after sampling using a Met- System. The statistical analyses were considered to be extremely statistically
tler-Toledo MX5 microbalance done using the IBM SPSS software significant. A comparison of respirable
(weight uncertainty
2 mg) in a room package, version 22. p < 0.05 were dust concentration before and after the
with controlled temperature and considered statistically significant. modification at coal handling area is
humidity to determine the mass of represented graphically in Figure 3.
the collected PM. The electrostatic The figure in parenthesis above the
charges of the micro-fiber filters were RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS bar graph indicates the percentage
minimized using a static neutralizer. reduction in dust concentration after
The calculation of dust concentration A total of eight subjects participated in the modification. It is revealed that
respirable dust was carried out the study. They had no difference in there is a reduction of 72–81% in the
through Data Spread sheet (TSI, their work pattern. 80 samples were total dust concentration.
USA). For optimum efficiency of the
cyclonic system, air flow rate was
maintained at a rate of 3.11 l/min. Table 1. Respirable Coal Dust Concentation (mg/m3) before Installation of Engineering Q9
Control.
PM5 Sampling N* AMy GMz Median GSDx Range
The eight subjects selected for PM5
Q6 samplings were adult male (25–55 Subject-1 5 6.28 6.27 6.12 0.41 5.88–7.03
year) engaged in unloading and charg- Subject-2 5 6.66 6.64 6.62 0.57 5.81–7.44
ing of coal into the boiler. The identi- Subject-3 5 6.94 6.85 6.51 1.16 5.73–9.03
fied subjects work for 48 hours per Subject-4 5 6.14 6.11 5.97 0.63 5.42–6.94
week in the same environment. The Subject-5 5 7.22 7.17 7.35 0.83 5.80–8.07
personal sampling was conducted for Subject-6 5 6.40 6.31 6.58 1.01 4.78–7.84
8 hours (06:00 AM–02:00 PM and Subject-7 5 6.73 6.69 6.81 0.79 5.42–7.89
02:00 PM–10:00 PM). Five samples Subject-8 5 5.91 5.83 6.25 0.93 4.28–6.81
were collected from each subject in
alternate days excluding non-working
days. Samples were collected on glass
micro-fiber filters (Whatman: 1820-
037) having a low resistance to airflow, Table 2. Respirable Coal Dust Concentration (mg/m3) after Installation of Engineer- Q10
a low affinity for moisture and a 98 ing Control.
percent collection efficiency for parti-
Na AM b GM c Median GSD d Range
cles of 0.5 m or large size. The glass
microfiber filters used for the study Subject-1 5 1.70 1.64 1.95 0.43 1.04–2.19
are commonly recommended for gravi- Subject-2 5 1.68 1.63 1.79 0.38 1.10–2.23
metric determination of airborne parti- Subject-3 5 1.44 1.38 1.49 0.42 0.98–2.08
culates stack sampling and absorption Subject-4 5 1.70 1.70 1.67 0.15 1.50–1.97
methods of air pollution monitoring. Subject-5 5 1.63 1.60 1.76 0.30 1.11–1.93
Subject-6 5 1.59 1.57 1.69 0.29 1.23–1.97
Water Mist System Subject-7 5 1.35 1.26 1.39 0.47 0.77–2.08
The mist system operates at 1,000 PSI Subject-8 5 1.61 1.59 1.60 0.22 1.27–1.93
generating 10 mm sized water droplets Note: all readings are taken between December 2015 and June 2016.aNumber of measur-
80 nozzles were vertically mounted ements.bArithmetic mean.cGeometric mean.dGeometric standard deviation.

Journal of Chemical Health & Safety, May/June 2017 3

Please cite this article in press as: K.A., V., and Hareendran, M1., Coal dust exposure reduction using water mist system: A case study. J.
Chem. Health Safety (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchas.2017.10.003
JCHAS 956 1–5

Figure 3. Comparison of dust concentration before and after engineering control on each subject.

Table 3. Comparison of Respirable Coal Dust Concentration (mg/m3) Before and
After Installation of Water Mist System.
Concentration before
water mist system
Mean 6.53
Variance 0.86
t Stat 31.21
P(T <= t) one-tail 3.31E  35
t Critical one-tail 1.67
P(T <= t) two-tail 6.62E  35
t Critical two-tail 2.01
CONCLUSIONS
The statistical analysis of the data con-
firms a significant reduction in air-
borne coal dust in the environment
of the boiler after the installation
of water mist system. The water mist
system reduced the respirable coal
dust concentration in the range of
72–81% at the coal feeding section
of the boiler. The respirable dust con-
centration reduced from 7.17 mg/m3
to 1.26 mg/m3 after the installation
of water mist system, which is lower
than the recommended upper limit of
2 mg/m3. This system is very much
feasible and cost effective for all envir-
onments of a traditional coal boiler.
The foundations laid by this research
work can be used as a base for further
studies in the future to find out the
effectiveness of each element in the
hierarchy of exposure control. Further
Concentration after
water mist system
1.60
0.14
studies considering personal behavior
and work style is needed to validate the
findings.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to express their
gratitude to the authorities at Dr. Red-
dy’s Laboratories. The authors declare
that there is no conflict of interests.
REFERENCES
1. Plog, Barbara A.; ; Quinlan, Patricia J.
Fundamentals of Industrial Hygiene:
National Safety Council. 2001.
2. IUPAC. Glossary of atmospheric chem-
istry terms, International Union of Pure
and Applied Chemistry, Applied Chem-
istry Division, Commission on Atmo-
spheric Chemistry. Pure Appl. Chem.
1990, 62, 2167–2219.
3. Von Essen, S.; Moore, G.; Gibbs, S.; et
al. Respiratory issues in beef and pork
production: recommendations from an
expert panel. J. Agromed. 2010, 15,
216–225.
4. Dressel, H.; Gross, C.; de la Motte, D.; et
al. Educational intervention decreases
exhaled nitric oxide in farmers with
occupational asthma. Eur. Respir. J.
2007, 30, 545–548.
5. Dressel, H.; Gross, C.; de la Motte, D.; et
al. Educational intervention in farmers
with occupational asthma: long-term
effect on exhaled nitric oxide. J. Investig.
Allergol. Clin. Immunol. 2009, 19, 49–
53.
6. Donham, K. J.; Lange, J. L.; Kline, A.; et
al. Prevention of occupational respira-
tory symptoms among certified safe farm
intervention participants. J. Agromed.
2011, 16, 40–51.
7. Kim, J.; Arrandale, V. H.; Kudla, I.; et al.
Educational intervention among farm-
ers in a community healthcare setting.
Occup. Med. (Lond.), 2012, 62, 458–
461.
8. Jenkins, P. L.; Stack, S. G.; Earle-
Richardson, G. B.; et al. Screening
events to reduce farmers’ hazardous
exposures. J. Agric. Saf. Health, 2007,
13, 57–64.
9. Reynolds, S. J.; Donham, K. J.; Whitten,
P.; et al. Longitudinal evaluation of Q7
dose-response relationships for environ-
mental exposures and pulmonary func-
tion in swine production workers. Am. J.
Ind. Med. 1996, 29, 33–40.
10. Choudhry, A. H.; Reynolds, S. J.;
Mehaffy, J.; et al. Evaluation of parlor
cleaning as an intervention for
decreased occupational exposure to
dust and endotoxin among dairy parlor

4 Journal of Chemical Health & Safety, May/June 2017

Please cite this article in press as: K.A., V., and Hareendran, M1., Coal dust exposure reduction using water mist system: A case study. J.
Chem. Health Safety (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchas.2017.10.003
JCHAS 956 1–5

workers—a pilot study. J. Occup.
Environ. Hyg. 2012, 9, 136–140.
11. Rodes, C. E.; Kamens, R. M.; Wiener,
R. W. The significance and character-
istics of the personal activity cloud on
exposure assessment measurements for
indoor contaminants. Indoor Air, 1991,
2, 123–145.
12. Sharma, R. K.; Pervez, S. Characteriza-
tion and enrichment study of selected
toxic elements in ambient particulate
matter around a phosphatic fertilizer
plant—a case study. J. Sci. Ind. Res.
2004, 63, 949–956.
13. Sharma, R. K.; Pervez, S. Chemical
characterization and enrichment of
selected elements in ambient particu-
late matter emitted from the cement
plant—a case study. J. Sci. Ind. Res.
2004, 63, 376–382.
14. Sharma, R. K.; Pervez, S. Seasonal var-
iation of PM10 and SPM levels around
a cement plant. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 2003,
62, 827–833.
15. Sharma, R. K.; Pervez, S. Spatial and
seasonal variability of ambient concen-
tration of particulate matter around an
integrated steel plant: a case study. J.
Sci. Ind. Res. 2003, 62, 838–845.
16. Sharma, R. K.; Pervez, S. Spatial varia-
bility of ambient particulate matter
around a phosphatic fertilizer plant in
India. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 2002, 61, 1077–
1083.

Journal of Chemical Health & Safety, May/June 2017 5

Please cite this article in press as: K.A., V., and Hareendran, M1., Coal dust exposure reduction using water mist system: A case study. J.
Chem. Health Safety (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchas.2017.10.003
View publication stats