Comparing the Two Methods of Ion Chromatography and Titration in Evaluating the Concentration of Sulfuric Acid Mist and Vapor in the General Air of the Electrolysis Unit of the Copper Production Industry

Mozaffari , Abbas; Mohammadi , Pejman*

doi:10.61186/j.health.15.2.143

[Home ] [Archive]

[ فارسی ]

Main Menu

Home

Journal Information

Articles archive

For Authors

For Reviewers

Registration

Contact us

Site Facilities

Flowchart of approve and expert process

indexing and abstracting

Search in website

Receive site information

Volume 15, Issue 2 (summer 2024)

j.health 2024, 15(2): 143-151

Back to browse issues page

Comparing the Two Methods of Ion Chromatography and Titration in Evaluating the Concentration of Sulfuric Acid Mist and Vapor in the General Air of the Electrolysis Unit of the Copper Production Industry

Abbas Mozaffari

, Pejman* Mohammadi ^*

Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Ardabil, Iran.

Abstract: (159 Views)

Background & objectives: Sulfuric acid, due to its extensive use in various industries such as copper, lead, and zinc extraction, poses harmful effects on the health of workers in these units. Therefore, accurately assessing the exposure levels of employees in these industries is essential. This study compares assessments using titration and ion chromatography methods to determine the exact exposure levels of workers in previous years, which were assessed using the titration method.
Methods: Sampling and analysis were simultaneously conducted at specific stations using both titration-based methods and ion chromatography. In the titration method, sodium hydroxide solution was used within a porous bubbler, and in the ion chromatography method, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Method 7903 was utilized. Statistical analysis of the results was performed using SPSS-18 software.
Results: The average acid concentration in the general air of the electrolysis cell house was 33.89 mg/m³ by the titration method and 0.119 mg/m³ by the ion chromatography method. The results indicated interference from sulfur dioxide gas in the titration method. No correlation was observed between the results of the two methods.
Conclusion: The titration method is not suitable for measuring sulfuric acid concentration in the air, especially in environments with high sulfur dioxide gas concentrations. Given the consistency of process conditions and ventilation in the studied electrolysis cell house during the study compared to previous years, the exposure levels can be considered in line with the results obtained from the ion chromatography method in this study.

Keywords: Sulfuric Acid Mist, Titration, Ion Chromatography, Electrolysis Cell House, Copper Industry

Full-Text [PDF 1357 kb] (106 Downloads)

Type of Study: Research | Subject: General
Received: 2024/07/29 | Accepted: 2024/07/31 | Published: 2024/07/31

References

1. Blair A, Kazerouni N. Reactive chemicals and cancer. Cancer Causes and Control. 1997;8(3):473-90. [DOI:10.1023/A:1018417623867]

2. Bråtveit M, Haaland IM, Moen BE, Målsnes A. Exposure to sulfuric acid in zinc production. Annals of occupational hygiene. 2004;48(2):159-70.

3. Juwara L, Boateng J. Assessing the effects of exposure to sulfuric acid aerosol on respiratory function in adults. arXiv preprint arXiv:190604296. 2019.

4. Vianna MIP, Santana VS, Loomis D. Occupational exposures to acid mists and gases and ulcerative lesions of the oral mucosa. American journal of industrial medicine. 2004;45(3):238-45. [DOI:10.1002/ajim.10343]

5. Grasel SS, Alves VAF, da Silva C, Cruz OLM, Almeida ERd, de Oliveira E. Clinical and histopathological changes of the nasal mucosa induced by occupational exposure to sulphuric acid mists. Occupational and environmental medicine. 2003;60(6):395-402. [DOI:10.1136/oem.60.6.395]

6. Chatterjee S, Tiwari S, Saxena S, Kumari A, Singh R. Association between occupational exposure to acidic chemicals and occupational dental erosion in the workers of a battery company in Bengaluru city: A case-control study. International Journal of Oral Care and Research. 2020;8(1):1-4. [DOI:10.4103/INJO.INJO_41_19]

7. Kalyani S, Reginald BA, Reddy BS, Samatha M. Dental Erosion-An Occupational Hazard among Battery Manufacturing Industry Workers in Hyderabad, India. Indian Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2024;28(1):41-4. [DOI:10.4103/ijoem.ijoem_85_23]

8. Sathiakumar N, Delzell E, Amoateng-Adjepong Y, Larson R, Cole P. Epidemiologic evidence on the relationship between mists containing sulfuric acid and respiratory tract cancer. Critical Reviews in Toxicology. 1997;27(3):233-51. [DOI:10.3109/10408449709089893]

9. Soskolne CL, Jhangri GS, Scott HM, Brenner DR, Siemiatycki J, Lakhani R, et al. A population-based case-control study of occupational exposure to acids and the risk of lung cancer: evidence for specificity of association. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. 2011;17(1):1-8. [DOI:10.1179/oeh.2011.17.1.1]

10. Lue SJ, Wu T, Hsu H, Huang C. Application of ion chromatography to the semiconductor industry: I. Measurement of acidic airborne contaminants in cleanrooms. Journal of Chromatography A. 1998;804(1-2):273-8. [DOI:10.1016/S0021-9673(98)00028-4]

11. Joo SH, Bhatti UH, Park HJ, Jeong DH, Baek IH, Nam SC, Lee KB. Selective removal of SO2 from coal-fired flue gas by alkaline solvents using a membrane contactor. Chemical Engineering and Processing-Process Intensification. 2020;147:107772. [DOI:10.1016/j.cep.2019.107772]

12. Crable JV, Taylor DG, Safety NIfO, Laboratories HDo, Documentation C, Development S, et al. NIOSH Manual of Analytical Methods: NIOSH monitoring methods: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); 1977.

13. Ma Z, Duan L, Jiang J, Deng J, Xu F, Jiang L, et al. Characteristics and threats of particulate matter from zinc electrolysis manufacturing facilities. Journal of cleaner production. 2020;259:120874. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120874]

Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article

‎ 10.61186/j.health.15.2.143

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Mozaffari A, Mohammadi P. Comparing the Two Methods of Ion Chromatography and Titration in Evaluating the Concentration of Sulfuric Acid Mist and Vapor in the General Air of the Electrolysis Unit of the Copper Production Industry. j.health 2024; 15 (2) :143-151
URL: http://healthjournal.arums.ac.ir/article-1-2877-en.html

Rights and permissions
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Volume 15, Issue 2 (summer 2024)

Back to browse issues page

Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.13 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4623