ArticleEnvironmental science. Nano2020
Characterization of aerosolized particles from nanoclay-enabled composites during manipulation processes.
Article in Environmental science. Nano, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigation of particle transfer to sampler covers during the transportation of samples.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 2021Article
- Nano- and microplastics in the workplace.Journal of occupational and environmental hygieneArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Manufacturing, processing, use, and disposal of nanoclay-enabled composites potentially lead to the release of nanoclay particles from the polymer matrix in which they are embedded; however, exposures to airborne particles are poorly understood. The present study was conducted to characterize airborne particles released during sanding of nanoclay-enabled thermoplastic composites. Two types of nanoclay, Cloisite® 25A and Cloisite® 93A, were dispersed in polypropylene at 0%, 1%, and 4% loading by weight. Zirconium aluminum oxide (P100/P180 grits) and silicon carbide (P120/P320 grits) sandpapers were used to abrade composites in controlled experiments followed by real-time and offline particle analyses. Overall, sanding the virgin polypropylene with zirconium aluminum oxide sandpaper released more particles compared to silicon carbide sandpaper, with the later exhibiting similar or lower concentrations than that of polypropylene. Thus, a further investigation was performed for the samples collected using the zirconium aluminum oxide sandpaper. The 1% 25A, 1% 93A, and 4% 93A composites generated substantially higher particle number concentrations (1.3-2.6 times) and respirable mass concentrations (1.2-2.3 times) relative to the virgin polypropylene, while the 4% 25A composite produced comparable results, regardless of sandpaper type. It was observed that the majority of the inhalable particles were originated from composite materials with a significant number of protrusions of nanoclay (18-59%). These findings indicate that the percent loading and dispersion of nanoclay in the polypropylene modified the mechanical properties and thus, along with sandpaper type, affected the number of particles released during sanding, implicating the cause of potential adverse health effects.
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.