ArticleMining engineering2015
Instituting a filtration/pressurization system to reduce dust concentrations in a control room at a mineral processing plant.
Article in Mining engineering, 2015. 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.
- Improving protection against respirable dust at an underground crusher booth.Mining engineering · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has observed that many control rooms and operator compartments in the U.S. mining industry do not have filtration systems capable of maintaining low dust concentrations in these areas. In this study at a mineral processing plant, to reduce respirable dust concentrations in a control room that had no cleaning system for intake air, a filtration and pressurization system originally designed for enclosed cabs was modified and installed. This system was composed of two filtering units: one to filter outside air and one to filter and recirculate the air inside the control room. Eighty-seven percent of submicrometer particles were reduced by the system under static conditions. This means that greater than 87 percent of respirable dust particles should be reduced as the particle-size distribution of respirable dust particles is greater than that of submicrometer particles, and filtration systems usually are more efficient in capturing the larger particles. A positive pressure near 0.02 inches of water gauge was produced, which is an important component of an effective system and minimizes the entry of particles, such as dust, into the room. The intake airflow was around 118 cfm, greater than the airflow suggested by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) for acceptable indoor air quality. After one year, the loading of the filter caused the airflow to decrease to 80 cfm, which still produces acceptable indoor air quality. Due to the loading of the filters, the reduction efficiency for submicrometer particles under static conditions increased to 94 percent from 87 percent.
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.