• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.405-415
• /
• 2014

Objectives: The aim of this study is to comprehensively summarize endotoxin levels reported in operations using metalworking fluids(MWFs). Methods: An extensive literature review was conducted of studies reporting endotoxin levels in processes using metalworking fluids. Keyword search terms included 'metalworking fluids', 'machining fluids', 'metalworking operation', 'machining operation' and 'endotoxin', which were used in combination. Results: A total of ten manuscripts were found to report on airborne endotoxin levels from metalworking operations in the automobile industry. Polycarbonate(PC), polyvinyl chloride(PVC) and mixed cellulose ester(MCE) were used to collect airborne endotoxin. Limulus Amebocyte Lysate was mainly used to quantify endotoxin amount. The levels of airborne endotoxin reviewed varied considerably, ranging from < $4EU/m^3$ to $790EU/m^3$, which was found to be far lower than those from cotton and potato processing plants, sawmills, and poultry farms. Several studies assumed that exposure to endotoxin could be a causative agent of respiratory diseases. Conclusions: Inhalation endotoxin exposure levels reported from metalworking operations were found to be lower than those from industries handling organic materials, even though it could be considered as a possible cause for several respiratory diseases.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.131-138
• /
• 2010

This technical report was developed to suggest the guideline to assess the safe use and handling metalworking fluids (MWFs) in machining operation. The basis of this method developed in this study was based on self assessment procedure recommended by Organization Resources Counselors (ORC) of the United States (US). In addition, various MWF management elements obtained from the review on various articles, reports and author's experience regarding MWF were newly added to the evaluation guideline. A total of four areas were finally selected in order to control exposure to MWF used in machining operations. They are all related to the presence and efficiency of the control measures, exposure assessment, management on tank and sump, and safe treatment of chips and metal fines generated during machining operations. Each area is consisted of several related elements. Several evaluation areas and elements used in this study could be revised, replaced, added and deleted according to the process environment, evaluation objectives and evaluator's (manager) criteria etc. This evaluation guide manual could be used for safe management of MWF in metalworking operation. In addition, industrial hygienists can use this evaluation method for auditing and evaluating the management status on MWF.

• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.1-10
• /
• 2012

The aim of this review was to assess current knowledge related to the occupational exposure limit (OEL) for fluid aerosols including either mineral or chemical oil that are generated in metalworking operations, and to discuss whether their OEL can be appropriately used to prevent several health risks that may vary among metalworking fluid (MWF) types. The OEL (time-weighted average; 5 mg/$m^3$, short-term exposure limit ; 15 mg/$m^3$) has been applied to MWF aerosols without consideration of different fluid aerosol-size fractions. The OEL, is also based on the assumption that there are no significant differences in risk among fluid types, which may be contentious. Particularly, the health risks from exposure to water-soluble fluids may not have been sufficiently considered. Although adoption of The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's recommended exposure limit for MWF aerosol (0.5 mg/$m^3$ ) would be an effective step towards minimizing and evaluating the upper respiratory irritation that may be caused by neat or diluted MWF, this would fail to address the hazards (e.g., asthma and hypersensitivity pneumonitis) caused by microbial contaminants generated only by the use of water-soluble fluids. The absence of an OEL for the water-soluble fluids used in approximately 80-90 % of all applicants may result in limitations of the protection from health risks caused by exposure to those fluids.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Precision Engineering Conference
• /
• 2003.06a
• /
• pp.1803-1806
• /
• 2003

Metalworking fluids (MWFs) are fluids used during machining and grinding to prolong the lift of the tool, carry away debris, and protect the surfaces of work pieces. These fluids reduce friction between the cutting tool and the work surface. reduce wear and galling, protect surface characteristics, reduce surface adhesion or welding and carry away generated heat. Workers can be exposed to MWFs by inhaling aerosols (mists) and by skin contact with the fluid. Skin contact occurs by dipping the hands into the fluid, splashes, or handling workpieces coated with the fluids. The amount of mist generated (and the resulting level of exposure) depends on many factors. To reduce the environmental pollution wastes and the potential health risks associated with occupational exposures to MWFs, it is required to establish optimum MWFs supply method and condition with minimum quantity in all over the mechanical machining field including high-speed type heavy cutting process.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.169-176
• /
• 2013

Objectives: The aim of this study is to critically review the health effects of not only direct exposure to biocide, but also indirect exposure to by-product hazardous agents generated through the use of biocide in metalworking operations. Methods: An extensive literature review was conducted of studies reporting on respiratory disease cases, particularly hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP), in environments using water-soluble metalworking fluids (MWFs). Keyword search terms included 'metalworking fluids', 'machining fluids', 'metalworking operation' 'machining operation' and 'biocide', which were also used in combination. Additional articles were identified in references cited in the articles reviewed. Results: Several of the field, epidemiological and experimental studies reviewed assumed that the symptoms and signs typical of HP developed in machinists who handled water-soluble MWF could be caused by inhalation exposure to nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM). Most NTM are known to be not only resistant to both biocide and disinfectant, but also to have acid-fast cell walls that are highly antigenic. The presence or persistence of the Mycobacterium species, referred to as NTM, in metalworking fluid-using operations may be caused by NTM contamination in either the natural water or tap water that is used to dilute the base oil and additives for water-soluble MWFs. This hypothesis that NTM contamination in water-soluble MWFs is a causative agent of HP has high biologic plausibility, such as antigenic property, hydrophobicity and small diameter (< 5 um). Conclusions: Aerosolized mycobacteria colonized from MWF are likely to be causing the HP. Inhalation exposure to mycobacteria should be considered as a possible cause for the development of HP.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.1-12
• /
• 2007

We have reviewed all cases and epidemiological studies that have reported the association between worker's exposure to metalworking fluids(MWF) and non-malignant respiratory diseases. The followings are main conclusions we critically reviewed. Exposure to MWF was believed to be significantly related to the risk of cough and phlegm. Relative risk caused by straight MWF was found to be higher in exposure to straight MWF than water-soluble MWF. We also found that exposure to water-soluble MWF significantly caused hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) and occupational asthma. The main culprits that cause the development of HP and asthma are believed to be microbes contaminated in MWF, ethanolamine and biocides. HP and asthma could be developed at even exposure to lower than $0.5mg/m^3$, exposure level recommended by NIOSH. Most epidemiological studies have reported that relationship between chronic bronchitis and exposure to MWF was significant. Although there were several studies that suggested the significant association between exposure to MWF and the development of rhinitis and sinusitis, we could not conclude the causal relationship because of lack of evidences.

• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.175-182
• /
• 2010

Objectives: This study examined how ethanolamines (EAs) with the same functional alcohol group ($HOCH_2CH_2$), such as mono-EA (MEA), di-EA (DEA), and tri-EA (TEA), in water-based metalworking fluids (wbMWFs) are vaporized, condensed, and transformed by heat generated during metalworking. Methods: Two types of experimental apparatus were manufactured to achieve these objectives. Results: Vaporization tests using a water bath showed that the vaporization rate increased markedly from $0.19\;mg/m^2{\cdot}min$ at $23.5^{\circ}C$ to $8.04\;mg/m^2{\cdot}min$ at $60^{\circ}C$. Chamber tests with a heat bulb revealed that "spiked" MEA was fully recovered, while only 13.32% of DEA and no TEA were recovered. Interestingly, non-spiked types of EAs were detected, indicating that heat could convert EAs with more alcohol groups (TEA or DEA) into other EAs with fewer group(s) (DEA or MEA). The EA composition in fresh fluid was 4% DEA, 66% TEA, and 30% MEA, and in used fluids (n = 5) was 12.4% DEA, 68% TEA, and 23% MEA. Conversion from TEA into DEA may therefore contribute to the DEA increment. Airborne TEA was not detected in 13 samples taken from the central coolant system and near a conveyor belt where no machining work was performed. The DEA concentration was $0.45\;mg/m^3$ in the only two samples from those locations. In contrast, airborne MEA was found in all samples (n = 53) regardless of the operation type. Conclusion: MEAs easily evaporated even when MWFs were applied, cleaned, refilled, and when they were in fluid storage tanks without any metalworking being performed. The conversion of TEA to DEA and MEA was found in the machining operations.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.171-180
• /
• 1997

The objectives of this study were both 10 discuss the sampling method for airborne metalworking fluids(MWF)' mist and 10 suggest measures to minimize worker's exposure to carcinogen contained in metalworking fluids. In order to measure airborne MWF mist, it seems to be appropriate to use NIOSH Method #0500(filler weight) rather than NIOSH Method # 5026(analysis by FTIR). Because MWF mist on PVC filter evaporated and migrated during sampling, worker's exposure to MWF could be underestimated. So, when evaluating worker's exposure to MWF mist, other environmental conditions also must be considered. Enclosure and local exhaust ventilation system seems to he the most effective measure and must be constructed with process facility. In order to control worker exposure to carcinogens contained in MWF, distillation type and condition for crude oil, PAH concentration in MWF, and viscosity index of MWF must legally be described.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Precision Engineering
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.50-62
• /
• 2003

Exposure to metalworking fluids (MWFs) has significantly been associated with cancer developed in multi-organs, respiratory diseases and skin diseases. Several carcinogens to humans or animals are contained in MWFs. They have been reported to be mineral oils, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), formaldehyde and N-nitrosodiethanolamine (NDELA). The great hazards of MWF have forced the advanced country including United States to regulate carcinogens contained in MWF. In 2001, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIHs) regarded MWF mist as suspected carcinogen to human (A2) and added it to “Notice of Intended Change (NIC)” list of 2001. In spite of the fact that much MWF has widely been used in many industries using machines, Korea has no legal actions for management of MWF. What is worse, even toxicity such as Carcinogenicity has not been reported. KS (Korean Standards) lists 7 advices of MWF but it does net state the hazards to health. It is very hard to control or minimize worker's exposure to MWF containing many carcinogens. Prier to the introduction of MWF to workplace, it is the most effective measure to regulate carcinogens below a certain level. Regulation on the content of PAH seems to be necessary because less amount of PAH in mineral oils improves the quality of MWF. Also, addition of nitrosating groups to MWF should be prohibited to minimize worker's exposure to NDELA. Employers and manufacturers should indicate the Carcinogenicity of all carcinogens in MWFs in Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) in order fer workers to recognize Carcinogenicity. Legal actions have to be taken to protect workers from health hazards due to exposure to MWF by further investigation on MWF.

• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.428-436
• /
• 2019

Background: Metalworking fluids (MWFs) are mixtures with inhalation exposures as mists, dusts, and vapors, and dermal exposure in the dispersed and bulk liquid phase. A quantitative risk assessment was performed for exposure to MWF and respiratory disease. Methods: Risks associated with MWF were derived from published studies and NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluations, and lifetime risks were calculated. The outcomes analyzed included adult onset asthma, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, pulmonary function impairment, and reported symptoms. Incidence rates were compiled or estimated, and annual proportional loss of respiratory capacity was derived from cross-sectional assessments. Results: A strong healthy worker survivor effect was present. New-onset asthma and hypersensitivity pneumonitis, at 0.1 mg/㎥ MWF under continuous outbreak conditions, had a lifetime risk of 45%; if the associated microbiological conditions occur with only 5% prevalence, then the lifetime risk would be about 3%. At 0.1 mg/㎥, the estimate of excess lifetime risk of attributable pulmonary impairment was 0.25%, which may have been underestimated by a factor of 5 or more by a strong healthy worker survivor effect. The symptom prevalence associated with respiratory impairment at 0.1 mg/㎥ MWF was estimated to be 5% (published studies) and 21% (Health Hazard Evaluations). Conclusion: Significant risks of impairment and chronic disease occurred at 0.1 mg/㎥ for MWFs in use mostly before 2000. Evolving MWFs contain new ingredients with uncharacterized long-term hazards.