ArticleThe Annals of occupational hygiene2016
Evaluation of a Dust Control for a Small Slab-Riding Dowel Drill for Concrete Pavement.
Article in The Annals of occupational hygiene, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experimental Evaluation of Respirable Dust and Crystalline Silica Controls During Simulated Performance of Stone Countertop Fabrication Tasks With Powered Hand Tools.Annals of work exposures and health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess the effectiveness of local exhaust ventilation to control respirable crystalline silica exposures to acceptable levels during concrete dowel drilling. APPROACH: Personal breathing zone samples for respirable dust and crystalline silica were collected while laborers drilled holes 3.5 cm diameter by 36 cm deep in a concrete slab using a single-drill slab-riding dowel drill equipped with local exhaust ventilation. Data were collected on air flow, weather, and productivity.
resultsAll respirable dust samples were below the 90 µg detection limit which, when combined with the largest sample volume, resulted in a minimum detectable concentration of 0.31 mg m(-3). This occurred in a 32-min sample collected when 27 holes were drilled. Quartz was only detected in one air sample; 0.09 mg m(-3) of quartz was found on an 8-min sample collected during a drill maintenance task. The minimum detectable concentration for quartz in personal air samples collected while drilling was performed was 0.02 mg m(-3). The average number of holes drilled during each drilling sample was 23. Over the course of the 2-day study, air flow measured at the dust collector decreased from 2.2 to 1.7 m(3) s(-1).
conclusionsThe dust control performed well under the conditions of this test. The initial duct velocity with a clean filter was sufficient to prevent settling, but gradually fell below the recommended value to prevent dust from settling in the duct. The practice of raising the drill between each hole may have prevented the dust from settling in the duct. A slightly higher flow rate and an improved duct design would prevent settling without regard to the position of the drill.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.