Overview
This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.
Key numbers
The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:
- of the CI samples, by 53% for lead and 32% for tin. However, if the FO analysis was added to the
- NIOSH has published stronger policy guidelines on their inclusion.(3) Table 1 of this
- reference(3) provides a summary of the proportion of wall deposits ranging from 5 to 53%
- for the median and from 12 to 91% for the maximum wall deposits when samples were
- within ±5%. Five field blank CFC cassettes and customized inserts were collected. Only
- Digestion was carried out with 20% nitric acid (volume/volume, aqueous) as follows. Once
- 10 mL of 20% nitric acid (v/v, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Pittsburgh, Pa.) was added to the
- activated and as the solutions heated (temperature range between 90°C and 95°C) there was
- Then, after cooling the beakers for ~60 sec, 10 mL of 2% (v/v) nitric acid was added to
- were then quantitatively transferred with 2% nitric acid to 25 mL glass volumetric flasks.
- From each volumetric flask a 0.20 mL aliquot was diluted (50:1) with 2% nitric acid in a 15
- Canada) which had been rinsed with 20% nitric acid prior to use. Yttrium solution (Claritas
- 20 ppb yttrium as an internal standard. Lead and tin contents were determined for each
- from 1 to 400 ppb for lead and tin for most runs, though in some cases a narrower range was
- 20 ppb and the sample re-analyzed under otherwise identical conditions. Media blank
- the samplers was outside the boundary between 2/3 and 7.(11) The LODs for the MCE filter-
- Ghost wipes, and CIs from the field blanks was negligible for lead (median mass < 2 µg for
- each sample type), with a single value of 3.4 µg /Ghost wipe. The median mass content for
- the median (50th percentile) ratios, indicating presence of a few extreme concentration
- ratios. As shown in Table I and Figure 1, a comparison of the GM concentrations between
- for tin) for both lead and tin, while the GM of the FO data was less than 55% (53% for lead
- and 32% for tin) of the GM of the CI data. When the measurements were divided into
- (filter plus interior wipe) ranged 4%–77% for lead and 14%–93% for tin. The GM
- 39% of lead measurements and 60% of tin measurements showed more mass on the interior
- As shown in Table II and Figures 3 and 4, all the pairs of samples showed a strong
- sampling for gravimetric and wet chemical analyses. In the present study, 39% of lead
- samples and 60% of tin samples showed more masses on the interior walls than on the filter
- mass (i.e., filter plus interior wipe) was 45% for lead and 56% for tin, again confirming that
- solid circles indicate the 5th (lower) and 95th (upper) percentiles (dashed line: mean).
- Tin CombinedB Exposure range (µg/m3) 2.1–1300 5.5–2200 4.9–2900 5.5–2200
Methods (brief)
- study was to compare metal particle concentrations as sampled by the customized insert (CI) in a
- CFC sampler with the traditional sampling method using only a MCE filter in the CFC. Thirty-
- nine personal and 13 area samples were taken using paired filter-based CFC and the CI in CFC
- samplers at a solder manufacturing plant. The CI was removed from its CFC, and digested and
- Ghost Wipe, and CI were separately dissolved in heated nitric acid for ICP-MS analysis. Overall,
- the geometric mean concentration of the filter-only (FO) samples was considerably lower than that
- of the CI samples, by 53% for lead and 32% for tin. However, if the FO analysis was added to the
- differences (all p-values < 0.05). In conclusion, incorporating the sampler internal non-filter
- aerosol sampling; CFC sampler; internal filter capsule; metals; Solu-CAP; Solu-Sert
- commonly expressed as mass concentration, that is, the quantity of contaminant collected on
- to date only considered the analysis of the filter of the CFC sampler for both gravimetric and
- should be assessed as part of the sample, and with the advent of more recent data
- for the median and from 12 to 91% for the maximum wall deposits when samples were
- collected at various workplaces. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- (OSHA) also has noted this issue and requires an inclusion of particles collected from the
- interior surfaces of the CFC sampler when producing personal sample results for
- Since the proportion of internal non-filter deposits in a sample is unpredictable, using a
- techniques,(4–6) direct sample extraction from the sampler,(6,7) and internal sampling
Implications
This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.
Wiki pages this source may touch
Verification notes
- Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing
wiki/sources/pages before creation. - Full-PDF read:
pdftotext -layoutwas run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written. - Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
- Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
- HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.
Update history
The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.