Inhalation Toxicology

International Forum for Respiratory Research

ISSN: 0895-8378 (Print) 1091-7691 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/iiht20

Measured removal rates of chrysotile asbestos

fibers from air and comparison with theoretical
estimates based on gravitational settling and
dilution ventilation

J. Sahmel, H. J. Avens, P. K. Scott, K. Unice, A. Burns, C. A. Barlow, A. K. Madl, J.

Henshaw & D. J. Paustenbach

To cite this article: J. Sahmel, H. J. Avens, P. K. Scott, K. Unice, A. Burns, C. A. Barlow, A. K. Madl,
J. Henshaw & D. J. Paustenbach (2015) Measured removal rates of chrysotile asbestos fibers
from air and comparison with theoretical estimates based on gravitational settling and dilution
ventilation, Inhalation Toxicology, 27:14, 787-801, DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216

View supplementary material Published online: 16 Dec 2015.

Submit your article to this journal Article views: 84

View related articles View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=iiht20

Download by: [University of Exeter] Date: 07 July 2016, At: 23:21

http://informahealthcare.com/iht
ISSN: 0895-8378 (print), 1091-7691 (electronic)

Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

! 2015 Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Measured removal rates of chrysotile asbestos fibers from air and

comparison with theoretical estimates based on gravitational settling
and dilution ventilation
J. Sahmel1, H. J. Avens1, P. K. Scott2, K. Unice2, A. Burns3, C. A. Barlow1, A. K. Madl4, J. Henshaw5, and
D. J. Paustenbach6
1
Cardno ChemRisk, Boulder, CO, USA, 2Cardno ChemRisk, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 3Cardno ChemRisk, Brooklyn, NY, USA, 4Cardno ChemRisk,
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA, 5Cardno ChemRisk, Sanibel, FL, USA, and 6Cardno ChemRisk, Jackson, WY, USA

Abstract Keywords
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

Context: Industrial hygiene assessments often focus on activity-based airborne asbestos Asbestos, concentration decay, exposure
concentration measurements, but few empirical data exist regarding the fiber removal rate modeling, fiber settling, fiber removal,
from air after activities cease. particulate removal
Objective: Grade 7T chrysotile indoor fiber settling (FS) rates were characterized using air
sampling (NIOSH Method 7402). History
Materials and methods: Six replicate events were conducted in a 58 m3 study chamber
(ventilation 3.5 ACH), in which chrysotile-contaminated work clothing was manipulated for Received 20 May 2015
15 min followed by 30 min of no activity. The fiber concentration decay constant and removal Revised 11 September 2015
rate were characterized using an exponential decay model based on the measurements. Accepted 9 October 2015
Results: Breathing zone airborne chrysotile concentrations decreased by 86% within 15–30 min Published online 7 December 2015
after fiber disturbance, compared to concentrations during active disturbance (p50.05).
Estimated mean time required for 99% of the phase contrast microscopy-equivalent (PCME)
fibers to be removed from air was approximately 30 min (95% CI: 22–57 min). The observed
effective FS velocity was 0.0034 m/s. This settling velocity was between 4.5-fold and 180-fold
faster than predicted by two different particulate gravitational settling models. Additionally,
PCME concentrations decreased approximately 2.5-fold faster than predicted due to air
exchange alone (32 versus 79 min to 99% decrease in concentration).
Discussion: Other measurement studies have reported similar airborne fiber removal rates,
supporting the finding that factors other than gravitational settling and dilution ventilation
contribute measurably to PCM fiber removal from air (e.g. impaction, agglomeration).
Conclusion: Overall, the scientific weight of evidence indicates that the time necessary for
removal of 99% of fibers greater than 5 mm in length (with aspect ratios greater than 3:1) is
approximately 20–80 min.

Introduction et al., 2011). It has also been theorized that asbestos fibers
could remain aloft for significant periods of time after
The three primary forms of commercial asbestos (chrysotile,
becoming airborne, and that fiber removal rates from air are
amosite, and crocidolite) have had many industrial uses over
primarily dependent on gravitational settling mechanisms.
the past century because of their physical properties,
For example, in 1986, the U.S. Environmental Protection
including heat resistance, strength, and flexibility (Virta,
Agency (EPA) stated in its Guidance for Preventing Asbestos
2006). However, these mineral fiber types (as a class) have
Disease Among Auto Mechanics that, ‘‘Asbestos released into
also been identified as a human carcinogen after sufficient
the air lingers around a garage long after a brake job is done
inhalation exposure (IARC (International Agency for
and can be breathed in by everyone inside a garage, including
Research on Cancer), 2012; NIOSH, 2008). As a result, in
customers’’ (USEPA, 1986, p. 1). Similarly, the Agency for
some industrial settings, exposure concerns have extended
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry stated in their 2001
beyond the primary worker to include bystanders and others
Toxicological Profile for Asbestos that ‘‘Large fibers are
remote to the immediate working environment (Donovan
removed from air and water by gravitational settling at a rate
dependent upon their size, but small fibers may remain
suspended for long periods of time’’ (ATSDR, 2001, p. 149).
Despite concerns about bystanders (Donovan et al., 2011)
Address for correspondence: J. Sahmel, Cardno ChemRisk, 4940 Pearl
East Circle, Suite 100, Boulder, CO 80301, USA. Tel: 303-416-1046. and residual exposure potential, very few data have been
E-mail: [email protected] collected to characterize the rate at which asbestos fibers in
788 J. Sahmel et al. Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

the size range of interest to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Research Group), 2003a,b; Platek et al., 1985; Stanton, 1973;
Health Administration (OSHA) and other regulatory agencies Stanton et al., 1977; Stettler et al., 2008). Some regulatory
are removed from air (i.e. fibers 5 mm in length and agencies specify using the PCM method to collect and count
0.25 mm in width, with an aspect ratio of 3:1 or greater, airborne fibers, and this method only counts fibers 5 mm in
detectable using the phase contract microscopy or PCM length (NIOSH, 1994b; OSHA, 1997). The minimum detect-
method). This lack of measured data has led to the practice of able fiber diameter counted by PCM is estimated to be
using of mathematical models to estimate the rate at which 0.25 mm. Since the PCM method cannot distinguish asbestos
asbestos fibers will likely settle out of air or be removed by fibers from non-asbestos fibers, techniques such transmission
ventilation. A number of these models have been based on the electron microscopy (TEM) methods (NIOSH, 1994a) can be
gravitational settling properties of particles using a small used to discriminate and estimate the concentration of
number of particle movement and interaction properties in the asbestos fibers only. When used in a method such as
air, such as particle density and aerodynamic diameter, and NIOSH 7402, PCM and TEM together can estimate airborne
often are not designed to specifically evaluate the rate at asbestos fiber concentrations for fibers meeting the specified
which fibrous-shaped particulates, such as asbestos, can be PCM dimensions. The resulting airborne asbestos fiber
removed from air. Existing particulate exposure estimation concentrations determined by NIOSH 7402 are often referred
models rely heavily on two primary factors to predict removal to as phase contrast microscopy-equivalent (PCME) concen-
time from air: (1) the ventilation or air exchange rate and (2) trations. Other than the minimum PCME length and width,
estimation of the gravitational (or terminal) settling rate the aspect ratio (i.e. 3:1 or greater) is the primary character-
(Drivas et al., 1996; Keil, 2000; Keil et al., 2009; Timbrell, istic which defines a particle as a fiber. The impact of such
1965). fiber-specific characteristics can be lost when equivalent
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

In many ventilation removal models used by industrial spherical diameters are used in gravitational settling models.
hygienists, the air exchange rate in a space is often assumed to Beginning in the 1970s, the scientific community pub-
be the primary removal mechanism for particulates (of any lished several estimates of airborne fiber exposure potential
shape) from the air through either simple mechanisms such as based on models using gravitational settling velocity (Bragg
air dilution (Keil, 2000) or more complex air movement et al., 1974; NRC, 1981; Sawyer & Spooner, 1978). In 1978,
mechanisms such as diffusion, turbulent eddy diffusion, or the U.S. EPA estimated the speed with which asbestos fibers
advection (Drivas et al., 1996; Nicas, 2001, 2011). Such may settle out of air (Sawyer & Spooner, 1978), and
models often do not distinguish between physical property concluded that based on estimates of gravitational settling,
differences of the contaminants under evaluation, including fibers of 5 mm in length with a 5:1 aspect ratio would require 4
whether a substance is in a gas or particulate form, or whether h to settle out of still air from a height of 9 feet. They also
there are other specific particulate characteristics that could estimated that fibers 2 mm and 1 mm in length would require
affect movement in air and removal from air (such as 20 and 80 h, respectively, to settle out of air. Similarly, the
particulate surface characteristics, dimensions, electrical National Research Council’s Committee on Indoor Pollutants
charge, and shape). estimated that in still air at a height of 3 meters, a fiber with
In gravitational settling models, the particle removal rate dimensions of 5 mm long by 1 mm in diameter would remain
from air is typically estimated using the diameter and density airborne for approximately 4 h, and that a fiber of the same
of particles, as well as the forces of gravity and viscosity of length with a 0.1 mm diameter would remain airborne for
air. When these models are applied, the ventilation rate is close to 20 h (NRC, 1981). Based on their calculations,
sometimes assumed to be very low or zero. Common PCME fibers (i.e. those equal to or longer than 5 mm) were
applications of this modeling approach therefore rely on the predicted to fall faster than shorter fibers, and fiber diameter
relationship between particle density and air viscosity to was also identified as an important factor, with thinner
determine the rate at which particles will be removed from the diameter fibers remaining airborne longer.
air. Additionally, because gravitational settling models often However, it has been recognized in the particle dynamics
assume that all particles are rigid spheres, a correction factor literature over many decades that factors other than venti-
such as the dynamic shape factor is frequently used to lation and gravitational settling velocity can have substantial
estimate an equivalent aerodynamic diameter for non-spher- effects on the removal efficiency of particulates from air.
ical particles (Hinds, 1999; Reist, 1984). Further, the These mechanisms of particle removal include van der
mathematical correction for non-spherical particle shapes to Waals forces, electrification, impaction on other bodies,
an equivalent sphere is often a simplistic approximation when centrifugation, agglomeration, diffusion, and cohesion due to
compared to the actual particulate shape, and can introduce water molecules (Corn, 1961a,b; Drinker & Hatch, 1954;
uncertainty into the resulting estimates for fiber settling (FS). Esmen, 1996; Hinds, 1999; Reist, 1984; Zimon & Corn,
For example, when estimating the aerodynamic diameter for 1969). Consistent with this particle dynamics research,
fiber sizes of interest to human health, the length, width, and limited laboratory and field studies have shown that asbestos
aspect ratio of the fibers must be combined into a single factor fibers and other particulates appear to remain airborne for
(Hinds, 1999). shorter periods of time than would be expected based on
When evaluating airborne asbestos fibers specifically, it is either gravitational settling velocity- or ventilation-based
well established in the published literature that fibers of less estimates alone (Corn & Stein, 1966; Moorcroft & Duggan,
than 5 mm in length are not considered to be biologically 1984). Therefore, additional quantitative data on asbestos
significant by regulatory agencies and a number of published fiber removal rates are important for accurately characteriz-
researchers (Berman, 2010; Davis et al., 1978; ERG (Eastern ing exposure potential, particularly given the interest in the
DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216 Rate of asbestos fiber removal from air 789

use of mathematical modeling for estimating exposure distributed within the chamber during the clothes loading
potential to airborne particulates (including asbestos) in a events (Sahmel et al., 2014).
variety of scenarios when no sampling data are available. The 7T chrysotile used to contaminate the clothing in this
Such data will also help to shed light on the relative impact study was delivered via aerial deposition using a remote-
of the factors that influence the removal of particulates controlled fiber release system that has been previously
and fibers from the air. described (Sahmel et al., 2014). The size distribution of the
The purpose of this study was to measure the rate of fibers found in the bulk chrysotile was also characterized and
removal from air of chrysotile fibers in the PCME size range is summarized in Supplemental Figure A. After the clothes
and to compare this rate to modeled estimates of the removal were contaminated with chrysotile, study participants per-
of asbestos from air based on simple theoretical calculations formed a total of six clothes handling and shake-out (SO)
relying only on factors such as gravitational settling and/or replicate events (Sahmel et al., 2015). The study chamber was
dilution ventilation. To evaluate removal rates from air, thoroughly decontaminated between each sampling event in
breathing zone airborne chrysotile fiber concentrations were order to minimize or eliminate the potential for any fiber
measured over time under known ventilation conditions in a resuspension from one event to another. Multiple 30-min
controlled study chamber. The PCME sampling results were clearance samples were collected prior to each sampling
then used to develop a fiber concentration decay curve that event to ensure that fiber concentrations in the chamber
characterized the observed rate of fiber removal. This curve were below the limit of detection for NIOSH 7400 (Sahmel
was used to estimate an overall concentration decay half-life et al., 2015).
and the time required to reduce the airborne concentration of For each SO event, the study participant handled and
PCME chrysotile fibers by 99%. The results were directly shook out the clothing for 15 min. The 15-min active clothes
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

compared to theoretical estimates of fiber removal rates handling time was followed by a 30-min period of no activity
from ventilation-only and gravitational settling velocity from which the FS rates could be evaluated. The airborne
models for fiber sizes of interest to human health risk concentrations of chrysotile in the clothes handler’s breathing
assessment. The results were also compared to previously zone were measured during both periods (Sahmel et al.,
published measurements of asbestos fiber removal rates in 2015). Substantial dust generation was visible in the chamber
the literature. during the handling and shaking out of the contaminated
clothing (see Supplemental Figure B). The schematic in
Methods Figure 1 depicts the relative time duration and the nomen-
clature used for samples collected during the active clothes
Study design and sample collection
handling and SO period and the FS period. During each event,
Prior to commencement of the study, an Institutional Review a total of six personal samples were collected from the
Board (IRB) reviewed and approved the study protocol breathing zone of the study participant at the following time
(Copernicus Group; Study ID #CRI1-11-208; Durham, NC). intervals: 0–5 min (right lapel) (SO 0–5 min), 0–15 min 2
Six replicate study events were conducted in which airborne (left and right lapels) (SO 0–15 min), 15–20 min (right lapel)
PCME chrysotile fiber concentrations were measured both (FS 0–5 min), 15–30 min (left lapel) (FS 0–15 min), and
during and after the handling and vigorous shaking of 30–45 min (left lapel) (FS 15–30 min). All air samples for
clothing that had been previously contaminated with Grade asbestos were collected in accordance with the NIOSH 7402
7T chrysotile asbestos (Sahmel et al., 2015). The 7T analytical method to determine airborne PCME asbestos fiber
chrysotile was obtained from Thetford Mines (Quebec, concentrations; details of the sampling procedures have been
Canada). The general characteristics of grade 7 chrysotile described previously (Sahmel et al., 2014, 2015).
have been defined by the Quebec Grading System; this
chrysotile grade was commonly used in commercial products
Air sampling data analysis
including papers, cements, asphalt roof coatings, paints,
welding rods, floor tile, and plastics (Mann, 1983). For each of the sampling periods shown in Figure 1, the mean,
The study was conducted in a chamber measuring approxi- median, 5th, 25th, 75th, and 95th airborne PCME chrysotile
mately 58 m3 in volume with dimensions of 4.7 m 4.8 m fiber concentration percentiles were calculated. Pairwise
2.5 m (RJ Lee Group; Monroeville, PA, USA). Ambient comparisons were performed between different sampling
outdoor temperatures during the study ranged from 17 C to periods using t-tests with the Bonferroni adjustment to
24 C during the study, while temperatures within the exposure account for multiple comparisons. Since there were two SO
chamber ranged from 19 C to 24 C. Humidity concentrations 0–15 min samples per event (left and right lapels), the average
outside the exposure chamber ranged from 21% to 43%, while of the two values was used in these analyses. To estimate the
levels inside the study chamber measured 25% to 54% (Sahmel percent decrease in TWA concentrations during FS sampling
et al. 2015). The chamber ventilation rate was measured using periods as compared to the clothes handling period, an overall
a sulfur hexafluoride inert tracer gas decay rate and found to be estimate of the concentration during fiber generation was
3.5 air changes per hour (ACH) (Sahmel et al. 2015). This air calculated by averaging together the SO 0–5 min, SO
exchange rate was targeted based on the rates reported by the 0–15 min (left lapel), and SO 0–15 min (right lapel) samples
U.S. EPA for natural room to room air movement in residential (see Supplemental Materials for further details). In addition,
buildings, and is likely to be below the rate found in most the rate of fiber removal was characterized by fitting an
industrial settings (Sahmel et al., 2015; USEPA, 2005). exponential decay curve to the measured data, as described in
Airborne concentrations were shown to be relatively uniformly detail below.
790 J. Sahmel et al. Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

Figure 1. Study sample timeline and nomenclature during study events.

Depiction of relative time duration and nomenclature used for each study event. Each event consisted of: (1) personal samples collected during active
chrysotile fiber generation (clothes handling and shake-out [SO], boxes in bold in the figure) and (2) personal samples collected during fiber settling
(taken after clothes handling during the fiber settling [FS] period).

Using an exponential decay equation to compare measured air sampling data’’, ‘‘(2) Distinguishing ventilation
measured and modeled rates of fiber removal from vs. non-ventilation effects: estimation of fiber concentration
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

air: prediction of fiber half-life and time needed for decay using measured dilution ventilation’’, and ‘‘(3)
99% of fibers to settle Modeling approach: estimation of fiber concentration decay
using calculated gravitational settling velocities’’. Then, the
For industrial hygiene and exposure assessment applications,
half-lives and times to 99% reduction in concentration were
decreases in airborne concentrations over time are commonly
examined for all three approaches. The fiber decay half-life
characterized using a simple exponential decay equation
and the time at which the concentration decreased by 99%
consistent with Equation (1) (Keil et al., 2009):
from the initial concentration were estimated from the fiber
C ðtÞ ¼ C0 expðktÞ ð1Þ decay constant (k) using Equations (3a) and (3b):

where t is the time (min), C(t) is the fiber concentration at lnð2Þ lnð100Þ
T1=2 ¼ ; T99% ¼ ð3a and 3bÞ
time t (f/cc), C0 is the initial fiber concentration at t ¼ 0 (f/cc), k k
and k is the overall fiber decay constant (1/min). In where T1/2 is the overall fiber decay half-life (min) and
implementing an exponential decay curve to characterize T99% is the time (min) at which the concentration decreases
the FS rate, the simplifying assumption was made that the by 99%.
concentration was uniform throughout the chamber.
The overall decay constant (k) can be estimated for a (1) Measurement approach: estimating the fiber decay
particular exposure scenario by fitting the decay curve constant (k) using measured air sampling data
(Equation 1) to measured data. Alternatively, in the absence
of measured concentration data, the overall decay constant (k) In order to characterize the observed rate of fiber removal
for fibers in air can be estimated using Equation (2) based on from air, Equation (1) was fit to the measured concentration
Drivas et al. (1996). The result can then be substituted for the data, yielding an estimate for k and C0. The decay constant
(k) value in Equation (1): that was fit from the measured data is referred to as kfit.
Although C0 is a measured value, letting the model fit this
A parameter yielded a better fit of the curve to the data as
k ¼ a þ wd ð2Þ
V compared to forcing C0 to equal the measured value. To fit the
decay curve to the measured data, it was necessary to estimate
where a is the measured ventilation rate (1/min), wd is the FS the airborne chrysotile concentration at the beginning of the
rate in (m/min), A is the area (m2) over which fiber deposition FS period. To characterize the initial airborne fiber concen-
occurs, and V is the volume (m3) of the room of interest. For tration for each event, the three time-weighted average (TWA)
this study, the ventilation rate was measured at a fixed rate of PCME concentrations from samples collected for each event
3.5 air changes per hour or 0.058 air changes per min, the area during active clothes handling and SO were averaged together
of the room was 24 m2, and the volume of the room was (i.e. SO 0–5 min, SO 0–15 min [left lapel], and SO 0–15 min
58 m3. Equation (2) is useful because it allows (k) to be [right lapel] depicted in Figure 1) (see Supplemental
defined in terms of multiple concentration decay factors, Materials for further details).
including both ventilation-only removal effects and non-
ventilation removal effects. (a) Decay curve fit to each study event separately. Due to
In order to compare the measured data to the decay rates variations in the amount of chrysotile released during each
expected from ventilation alone and calculated gravitational event, the starting air concentration in the breathing zone for
settling, fiber decay curves were generated based on three each study event (SO 0–5 min and SO 0–15 min samples)
approaches, as described in the sections ‘‘(1) Measurement varied. Therefore, an exponential decay curve was initially fit
approach: estimation of fiber concentration decay using to the data from each event separately.
DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216 Rate of asbestos fiber removal from air 791

(b) Decay curve fit to all study events. To investigate trends decay curves were also generated that relied on calculated
across all events, the decay curve was also fit to concentration estimates of gravitational settling velocity (wd) based on
data that were normalized by dividing each concentration by modeling approaches described in the literature. In the
the estimated initial concentration for that event, such that all absence of ventilation, the fiber decay curve would rely
normalized initial concentrations were equal to 1. Additional only on the calculated gravitational settling velocity (wd),
details on the approach used to fit Equation (1) to the measured the room area (A), and the room volume (V) as shown in
data have been provided in the Supplemental Materials. Since Equation (7).
kfit was fit from the measured concentration data, the resulting
A
fiber decay curve did not rely on Equation (2). k ¼ wd ð7Þ
V
(2) Distinguishing ventilation versus non-ventilation fiber In the presence of ventilation, the fiber decay curve would
removal effects: estimating the fiber decay constant (k) using also rely on the ventilation rate (a) as shown in Equation (2).
measured dilution ventilation In this study, two gravitational settling model approaches
(a) Ventilation effects. Rather than relying on measured data, from the literature were selected to calculate the gravitational
the decay constant (k) in Equation (1) may also instead be settling velocity (wd) parameter in Equations (2) and (7) for
calculated from the ventilation rate and/or an assumed FS rate fibers.
as shown in Equation (2). It is of interest to consider the (a) The first gravitational settling model used was from
relative contribution to overall fiber removal from different Sawyer and Spooner and is a historical gravitational
removal mechanisms. Ventilation was expected to be a large settling calculation approach for fibers (Sawyer &
contributor to airborne fiber removal in the current study. To Spooner, 1978).
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

estimate the contribution that ventilation had upon the (b) The second gravitational settling model came from Hinds,
observed fiber removal rate, a fiber decay curve was created and is a newer gravitational settling model (Hinds, 1999).
in which ventilation was assumed to be the only fiber removal The Hinds model incorporated a unitless shape factor to
mechanism. This was achieved by setting the decay constant account for the fibrous shape of asbestos particles, whereas
(k) in Equation (2) equal to the measured ventilation rate (a) the method used by Sawyer and Spooner treated the fibers as
as shown in Equation (4): ellipsoids (Hinds, 1999; Sawyer & Spooner, 1978). Details on
the gravitational settling model calculations have been
k¼a ð4Þ provided in the Supplemental Materials.

(b) Observed non-ventilation effects. It was also of interest to Results

determine the contribution of non-ventilation effects to the
Analysis of the fiber settling air sample results
observed fiber removal rate. These non-ventilation effects can
include gravitational settling, but also such effects as electri- The distribution of the PCME airborne concentrations across
fication, impaction, and agglomeration and their combined the six replicate events for each of the sampling time periods
effect on fiber removal from air based on the measured data. is presented using box plots in Figure 2. Results for all of the
To estimate the rate of concentration decay attributable to
non-ventilation fiber removal effects alone, a decay curve was
created in which the decay constant was calculated as shown 6.0
in Equation (5):
Airborne Concentraon (PCME) (f/cc)

5.0
k ¼ kfit, 16 a ð5Þ
where kfit,1–6 is the decay constant fit to the combined 4.0

measurement data across all six events, and a is the measured 3.0
ventilation rate. a
An estimate of the observed effective FS velocity can be 2.0

determined by rearranging Equation (2) to solve for wd as 1.0

b
shown in Equation (6):
0.0
V SO - SO - FS - FS - FS -
wd, obs ¼ kfit, 16 a ð6Þ 0 to 5 0 to 15 0 to 5 0 to 15 15 to 30
A
Clothes Handling and Shakeout Fiber Seling aer Clothes
As discussed, this effective observed FS velocity (wd,obs) Handling and Shake Out
will encompass all non-ventilation removal mechanisms that Sampling Duraon (min)

may have occurred during this study, and thus is distinct Figure 2. Box plots of measured concentration data for fiber removal
from the settling rates estimated using gravitational settling from air. This figure shows the 50th percentile, 5th, 25th, 75th, and 95th
models alone. percentiles, and average breathing zone concentrations (black dot) for
each sampling period. Letters and notations below the figure indicate the
sampling periods for which the mean concentration was statistically
(3) Modeling approach: estimating the fiber decay constant significantly lower (signified by the symbol ‘‘«’’) compared to other
(k) using calculated gravitational settling velocities sampling periods (t-test, Bonferroni-adjusted ¼ 0.05). All samples
were detected above the LOD.
To evaluate the utility of gravitational settling models alone a. FS 0–15 min « SO 0–5 min.
for estimating the rate of airborne fiber removal, fiber b. FS 15–30 min « SO 0–5 min and SO 0–15 min.
792 J. Sahmel et al. Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

asbestos airborne concentration samples collected in chrysotile PCME concentration decay half-life for each
the breathing zone were above the limit of detection for the sampling event (n ¼ 6). The apparent decay half-lives for
NIOSH 7400 and 7402 methods. The lowest reported limit each event ranged from 1.1 to 11.4 min.
of quantitation for the samples used in this study was
0.0057 f/cc. Each box plot represents the percentiles of the (b) Decay curve fit to all study events.In order to analyze
sampling distribution for the time period of interest. The the trend of all six events together, the airborne concen-
mean PCME fiber concentration during the last 15 min of FS tration data for all events were normalized by dividing
(FS 15–30 min) was statistically significantly lower than the each concentration by the initial fiber concentration for
concentration during the clothes handling period (SO 0–5 min that event, such that the normalized initial concentration
and SO 0–15 min). Additionally, the mean concentration for each event was 1. Then, a concentration decay curve
during the first 15 min of FS (FS 0–15) was statistically (again using Equation (1)) was fit to the normalized data
significantly lower than the mean concentration during the for all six events combined. Figure 4 shows the combined
first 5 min of clothes handling (SO 0–5 min). These data decay curve for all six events using the best estimate of
confirm that significant decreases in fiber concentration are the model parameters (kfit and C0), as well as the decay
observed within the first 15–30 min after the generation of curves obtained using the upper and lower 95% confidence
fibers ceased. The measured TWA concentrations for the limits (UCL and LCL, respectively) of the model param-
period 15–30 min after fiber generation ceased (FS 15– eters. To facilitate a direct comparison of the measured
30 min) were reduced 86% on average (range: 80–92% data to the fitted decay curves, the measured TWA
reduced) compared to concentrations measured during the concentrations were also added to Figure 4 for compari-
fiber generation period, indicating that the vast majority of the son, with the FS 0–5 min samples shown at 2.5 min, the
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

fibers were removed from the air within 30 min. FS 0–15 min samples shown at 7.5 min, and the FS 15–
30 min samples shown at 22.5 min. Additionally, the TWA
Fiber half-life and time needed for 99% of fibers to concentration values from the best fit, UCL, LCL, and
settle: results of using an exponential decay equation ventilation-only decay curves for the corresponding time
to compare measured and modeled rates of fiber periods (FS 0–5 min, FS 0–15 min, and FS 15–30 min)
removal from air have been provided in Supplemental Table C. Nearly all of
(1) Measurement approach: estimation of fiber concentration the measured breathing zone concentration values fell
decay using measured air sampling data within the 95% confidence interval of the decay curve.
For each of the six events and for all events combined,
To facilitate an estimate of the instantaneous (as opposed to Table 1 provides the key fitted parameters and calculated
the TWA) concentration at specific time points, the observed values, including the initial fiber concentration (C0) (f/cc,
fiber removal rate was characterized by fitting the exponential PCME), the decay coefficient (kfit) (1/min), the estimated
concentration decay curve described in Equation (1) to the fiber concentration decay half-life (min), and the estimated
measured TWA chrysotile concentrations. time to 99% removal of the fibers from the air (min).
As shown in Table 1, the measured initial PCME
(a) Decay curve fit to each study event separately. Figure 3 concentrations during the fiber generation period ranged
presents the fitted concentration decay curve and apparent across the events from 1.2 f/cc to 5.4 f/cc. The R2 value

Figure 3. Results of fitting the exponential 6

decay equation to the measured airborne Airborne Chrysole Concentraon Decay (PCME)
chrysotile concentrations by event. For each by Study Event
study event, an exponential concentration 5
Airborne Concentraon (PCME) (f/cc)

decay curve (Equation 1) was fit to the

airborne chrysotile breathing zone concen-
Decay Curves Fit to Measured Concentraon Data
tration PCME measurements separately. The 4
resulting decay curves are plotted. The cor- Event 1 (apparent decay half-life = 2.0 min)
responding apparent chrysotile PCME con- Event 2 (apparent decay half-life = 11.4 min)
centration decay half-life for each event is Event 3 (apparent decay half-life = 1.1 min)
also noted. 3
Event 4 (apparent decay half-life = 5.1 min)
Event 5 (apparent decay half-life = 7.1 min)
2 Event 6 (apparent decay half-life = 5.5 min)

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (min)
DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216 Rate of asbestos fiber removal from air 793
Figure 4. Results of fitting the exponential Normalized Airborne Chrysole Concentraon Decay (PCME)
decay equation to the measured airborne for All Study Events Combined
chrysotile concentrations for all events com- 1.2
bined and comparison to the expected con-
centration decay associated with ventilation

Concentraon / Inial Concentraon

1.0
effects alone. A single exponential concen-
tration decay equation (Equation 1) was fit to
the airborne chrysotile breathing zone con- 0.8
centration PCME measurements for all events
combined and was plotted for comparison
with the expected concentration decay 0.6
attributable to ventilation effects alone
(measured ventilation of 3.5 ACH). The data
were normalized by dividing each measure- 0.4
ment by the measured initial concentration
for the same study event. Decay concentra-
tion estimates are shown employing both the 0.2
best estimates for the Equation (1) param-
eters, as well as using the 95% lower
0.0
confidence limit (LCL) and 95% upper
confidence limit (UCL) estimates of the 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Equation (1) parameters. The six measured Time (min)
TWA concentrations during the first 5 min
after SO are shown at time ¼ 2.5 min. The six Normalized Decay Curve Fit to Measured Data (Best Fit)
measured TWA concentrations during the Normalized Decay Curve Fit to Measured Data (95% LCL)
Normalized Decay Curve Fit to Measured Data (95% UCL)
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

first 15 min after SO are shown at time ¼ 7.5

min. The six measured TWA concentrations Normalized Decay Curve Expected from Venlaon Effects Alone
between 15 min and 30 min after shake out Normalized TWA Values
are shown at time ¼ 22.5 min.

Table 1. Characterization of the fiber concentration decay curves fit to measured data and comparison to the decay curves expected based on only
ventilation effects.

Estimated initial
Measured initial breathing
breathing zone fiber
zone fiber concentration Estimated fiber Estimated
Events included in concentration (C0) (f/cc, Decay coefficient Settling concentration decay time to 99%
the model (f/cc, PCME)a PCME) (k) (1/min) R2 velocity (m/s) half-life (min) removal (min)b
Event 1 1.19 1.19 0.353 99% 0.0119 2.0 13.0
Event 2 2.36 2.28 0.061 97% 0.0001 11.4 75.5
Event 3 2.06 2.06 0.615 97% 0.0224 1.1 7.5
Event 4 2.91 2.92 0.137 100% 0.0032 5.1 33.6
Event 5 4.11 3.85 0.097 99% 0.0016 7.1 47.5
Event 6 5.35 5.18 0.127 99% 0.0028 5.5 36.3
Average 3.00 2.91 0.232 NA 0.0070 5.4 35.6
Events 1–6 Best fit model 1.00 0.95 0.143 94% 0.0034 4.8 32.2
Events 1–6 LCL model 1.00 0.82 0.206 NA 0.0059 3.4 22.4
Events 1–6 UCL model 1.00 1.07 0.081 NA 0.0009 8.6 56.9
Ventilation Only Model 1.00 1.00 0.058 NA 0.0000 11.9 78.9
a
When the decay curve was fit to measured data from each event separately, the initial fiber concentration (t ¼ 0 min) was estimated considering the
duration of each sample during the fiber generation period: [(5/20)*(SO 0–5 min sample) + (15/20)*(SO 0–15 min sample)]. For the curve fits that
considered all of the events together, the concentrations were normalized such that the initial concentration was equal to 1.
b
The estimated time to 99% removal is the time required for the initial airborne fiber concentration to decrease by 99%.

(2) Distinguishing ventilation versus non-ventilation effects:

for the model fit across all events was 94%. For the
estimation of fiber concentration decay using measured
combined decay curve, estimated mean fiber half-life was
dilution ventilation
4.8 min (95% CI: 3.4–8.6 min) and the average time to
99% fiber removal from the air was 32 min (95% CI: Since ventilation was expected to be
(a) Ventilation effects.
22–57 min). one of the major mechanisms of fiber removal in the current
794 J. Sahmel et al. Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

time to 99%

Calculations were performed using the historic gravitational settling model published by Sawyer & Spooner (1978) (Modeling Approach 3a) and an updated gravitational settling model version published by Hinds
(1999) (Modeling Approach 3b). The fiber removal estimates were calculated first without consideration for airborne fiber losses due to air exchange (i.e. zero ventilation was assumed), and then calculated again
Estimated
study, it was of interest to compare the measured breathing

removal
(min)a

78.6

76.2
59.4

79.2
79.2
78.6
78.6
75.6
zone airborne chrysotile concentrations to the estimated

78

75

66

78
concentrations that would be expected based on ventilation

Including losses due to air exchange

effects alone. The dilution ventilation rate measured in the
study chamber was 3.5 ACH. The fiber decay curve that

removal (h)a
time to 99%
Estimated
would be expected based on ventilation effects alone is

1.30
1.31
1.25
1.27
0.99
1.10
1.32
1.32
1.31
1.31
1.26
1.30
shown in Figure 4 along with the measured TWA concen-
tration data. All but one of the measured TWA breathing
zone concentrations were lower than would have been

concentration

half-life (h)
expected if fiber removal had occurred by ventilation alone.

Calculated

decay

0.196
0.196
0.188
0.191
0.150
0.166
0.198
0.198
0.197
0.197
0.190
0.195
fiber
The fiber concentration decay half-life based on only
ventilation removal effects at this rate of dilution was
12 min, and the time to 99% fiber removal from air due to

Table 2. Characterization of the fiber concentration decay rates based on calculated gravitational settling velocities with and without consideration of ventilation.
dilution ventilation mechanisms alone was 79 min (Table 1).

Calculated

coefficient
These results indicate that removal mechanisms in addition

decay

(1/h)
3.53
3.53
3.68
3.64
4.63
4.17
3.50
3.50
3.52
3.51
3.64
3.55
to ventilation were an important factor in the observed
FS rate.

removal (h)a
Estimated

to 99%

136
160

14 582
206
404
4
7
6374
25
34

32
87
time
Excluding losses due to air exchange
(b) Observed non-ventilation effects. Non-ventilation effects
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

that likely contributed to or affected the observed rate of

fiber removal from the breathing zone included simple

including losses due to reasonable air exchange (3.5 ACH). The time to 99% removal was calculated for a range of fiber dimensions.
gravitational settling of the fibers, as well as other factors

Calculated fiber
concentration

half-life (h)
such as adhesion to surfaces and agglomeration of the

20.5
24.1

31.0
60.7

13.1
959.4
3.8
5.0
0.6
1.0

2194.8

4.8
decay
fibers in air. To characterize the impact that these non-

The estimated time to 99% removal is the time required for the initial airborne fiber concentration to decrease by 99%.
ventilation factors had on fiber removal, a fiber decay
curve was generated that accounted for the remainder of the
observed fiber removal that was not already attributable to Calculated

coefficient
ventilation. An effective observed FS velocity encompass- decay

0.034
0.029
0.183
0.137
1.134
0.669
0.001
0.000
0.022
0.011
0.145
0.053
(1/h)
ing all non-ventilation effects was calculated and found to
be 0.0034 m/s on average (95% CI: 0.0009–0.0059 m/s).
The estimated fiber concentration decay half-life was 8 min
Calculated

and the time to 99% fiber removal was 54 min for non-
velocity

2.3E-05
1.9E-05
1.2E-04
9.2E-05
7.6E-04
4.5E-04
4.9E-07
2.1E-07
1.5E-05
7.7E-06
9.7E-05
3.6E-05
settling

(m/s)

ventilation effects (compared to 79 min for ventilation

effects alone) (Table 1). Thus, for the conditions assessed
in this study, it appears that the non-ventilation fiber
(1978)

(1978)

(1978)

(1978)

(1978)

(1978)
removal effects were slightly larger than the ventilation
fiber removal effects.
Theoretical approach

Sawyer & Spooner

Sawyer & Spooner

Sawyer & Spooner

Sawyer & Spooner

Sawyer & Spooner

Sawyer & Spooner

Hinds (1999)

(3) Modeling approach: estimation of fiber concentration

Hinds (1999

Hinds (1999

Hinds (1999

Hinds (1999

Hinds (1999

decay using calculated gravitational settling velocities

To evaluate the utility of calculated gravitational settling
velocities for estimating airborne fiber removal rates, fiber
3b.

3b.

3b.

3b.

3b.

3b.
3a.

3a.

3a.

3a.

3a.

3a.

concentration decay curves were also derived using

calculated gravitational settling velocities for fibers of
Upper end: length ¼ 100 mm,

Upper end: length ¼ 100 mm,

Mid-range: length ¼ 20 mm,

Mid-range: length ¼ 20 mm,

various dimensions. One set of decay curves was derived

Lower end: length ¼ 5 mm,

Lower end: length ¼ 5 mm,

Fiber length/diameter

diameter ¼ 0.125 mm

assuming that the calculated settling velocity was the

diameter ¼ 0.25 mm

diameter ¼ 0.02 mm

diameter ¼ 0.25 mm
category range

diameter ¼ 0.5 mm

only removal mechanism (i.e. no ventilation), and a

diameter ¼ 1 mm

second set of decay curves was derived from the

calculated settling velocities in combination with an
assumed ventilation rate of 3.5 ACH. The derived
decay curves were then used to estimate fiber half-life
and time to 99% fiber removal (Table 2). Two different
modeling approaches were used to estimate asbestos fiber
diameter category

length45 mm,

length45 mm,

gravitational settling rates: (a) the historic published

PCME fibers:

gravitational settling model approach (Sawyer and

40.25 mm

50.25 mm
Fiber length/

diameter

diameter

Spooner, 1978) and (b) the more recently published

Fibers:

gravitational settling model approach (Hinds, 1999).

a
DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216 Rate of asbestos fiber removal from air 795

Historic published gravitational settling model approach appropriate ventilation rate. As shown in Table 2, when
(Sawyer & Spooner, 1978) and more recently published ventilation was assumed to be zero, the estimated time to 99%
gravitational settling model approach (Hinds, 1999) fiber removal ranged from 4 to over 14 000 h (rather than
minutes), whereas when ventilation effects were included, the
For both gravitational settling model approaches (Hinds,
estimated time to 99% removal ranged from 0.99 to 1.32 h
1999; Sawyer & Spooner, 1978), three different ranges of
(59.4–79.2 min).
fiber lengths and diameters were considered in the calcula-
Thinner fibers had slower estimated settling velocities than
tions based on the PCME fiber dimension definitions, as well
thicker fibers (Table 2), an effect that is directly related to the
as the results of the bulk dimension analysis for the 7T
smaller mass of the thinner fibers compared to thicker fibers
chrysotile used in the study (Supplemental Figure A). These
of the same length. When ventilation effects were excluded,
ranges were organized according to a lower end, a mid-range,
the slower estimated FS velocities associated with thinner
and an upper end range of fiber dimensions. The lower end
fibers led to longer estimated times to reach 99% removal.
range was derived from the lower bound values of the
Likewise, when ventilation was ignored, the Sawyer and
minimum PCME dimension definitions, which were specified
Spooner method yielded longer estimated times to 99%
as a length of 5 mm and diameter of 0.25 mm. The mid-range
removal compared to the Hinds method. However, when an
values were derived from a length of 20 mm and diameter of
appropriate ventilation rate was considered in addition to
0.5 mm, which were approximately the mean length and width
gravitational settling, the effects of gravitational settling
of PCME measured fibers from the bulk analysis, respect-
model selection and fiber width on the fiber removal rate
ively, and the upper end were derived from a length of 100 mm
were minimal (overall time to 99% removal 59–79 min).
and diameter of 1 mm, which were approximately equal to the
These results indicate that dilution ventilation had a far
maximum length and diameter from the bulk analysis of the
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

greater effect on estimated removal rates than calculated

chrysotile fibers used in the study.
gravitational settling alone.
In addition to considering fibers within the PCME size
The gravitational settling velocities estimated for the
range, gravitational settling calculations were also performed
PCME size fraction spanned a large range from 0.000019 to
for fibers with diameters less than the PCME method
0.00076 m/s, which is 4.5-fold to 180-fold slower than the
minimum width of 0.25 mm. For the same fiber lengths of
mean observed effective FS velocity of 0.0034 m/s. These
5, 20, and 100 mm, the following widths were defined: a lower
findings indicate that simple gravitational FS models do not
end width of 0.02 mm, which was the minimum diameter
adequately account for all of the non-ventilation factors that
measured in the bulk analysis, a mid range of 0.125 mm,
may affect FS and fiber removal from air, and that gravita-
which was the midpoint of measured data for the category,
tional settling models alone without consideration of an
and an upper end of 0.25 mm, which was the upper bound for
appropriate ventilation rate are likely to result in fiber
widths below the PCME size range.
removal rates that are significantly longer than measured
Table 2 presents the results of the gravitational settling
fiber removal rates.
model calculations for each fiber category (PCME and non-
PCME), each fiber length/diameter range (lower, mid, and
Discussion
upper), and each calculation method (Hinds, 1999; Sawyer &
Spooner 1978). The most striking finding across the modeling This study used measured data from the breathing zone to
calculations was the tremendous difference observed in characterize the removal rate of PCME chrysotile fibers
calculated settling times when gravitational settling was from air in a controlled environment with a measured
estimated assuming zero ventilation compared with an ventilation rate of 3.5 ACH. To estimate the instantaneous

Table 3. Summary comparison of estimated times to 99% fiber removal from the air for the approaches evaluateda: (1) reliance on measured
concentration data, (2) consideration of measured ventilation versus observed non-ventilation effects, and (3) calculation of gravitational fiber settling
rates.

Assumed ventilation rate Estimated time to 99% PCME

General approach Specific approach (ACH) fiber removal (min)
1. Measured concentration data 1b. Decay curve fit to measured NA (decay curve fit to data, not 32 (95% CI: 22–57)
concentration data across all calculated from ventilation
six events rate)
2. Ventilation versus 2a. Decay curve expected from 3.5 (measured ventilation rate) 79
non-ventilation effects measured dilution ventila-
tion only
2b. Decay curve attributable to 0 54
observed non-ventilation
effects only
3. Calculated gravitational 3a. Decay curve based on fiber 0 240–8160
fiber settling rates settling rates calculated by 3.5 59–78
the Hinds model
3b. Decay curve based on fiber 0 420–9600
settling rates calculated by 3.5 66–79
the Sawyer and Spooner
model
a
The estimated time to 99% removal is the time required for the initial airborne fiber concentration to decrease by 99%.
796 J. Sahmel et al. Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

(rather than TWA) fiber concentrations at specific time The exponential decay curve approach used in the study
points, a concentration decay curve was fit to the measured analysis assumed a uniform concentration throughout the
data. This fitted decay curve was used to estimate the time study chamber. A detailed spatial fiber dispersion analysis
required for the initial concentration to fall by 99%. These was beyond the scope of this study. Although ventilation and
measurement-based fiber removal rates were also compared gravitational settling effects models were evaluated in com-
to estimates for fiber removal using dilution ventilation and parison to measurement data collected in the personal
non-ventilation fiber removal factors (such as agglomer- breathing zone near a localized emission source, the results
ation, impaction, and adherence to surfaces), as well as suggest that similar trends in fiber removal rates are likely to
gravitational settling calculations for similar-sized fibers. be seen at other locations in the chamber more distant from
Table 3 presents an overall comparison of the three the localized emission source. This is evidenced by the
approaches used for estimating the time to 99% removal: finding that the shape of the fiber decay curves was fairly
(1) reliance on the measured FS data, (2) consideration of consistent across a range of initial fiber concentrations and
effects from measured ventilation versus observed non- did not show a trend associated with initial fiber concentration
ventilation effects, and (3) reliance on calculated gravita- (Figure 3). Therefore, it is expected that although other
tional settling velocities, with and without consideration of locations in the study chamber could have had a different
dilution ventilation. maximum concentration compared to the personal
Based on the data collected in this study and the samples, the rate of fiber removal is likely to have been
concentration decay equation (Equation 1) fitted to the similar.
measured breathing zone data, 99% of chrysotile fibers in the
size range counted using the PCME method (5 mm in
Comparison to other published studies reporting
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

length, 0.25 mm in width, 3:1 aspect ratio) settled out or

measured fiber settling data
were removed from air in about a half hour (mean 32 min,
95% CI: 22–57 min) (Table 3). The measured TWA concen- As previously noted, several other studies have been published
trations for the period 15–30 min after fiber generation ceased that have also reported measured data on the rate at which
were reduced 86% on average (range: 80–92%) compared to asbestos fibers settle out of the air (Brune & Beltesbrekke,
concentrations during the fiber generation period. This study 1981; Burdett & Stacey, 2001; Madl et al., 2008; Moorcroft &
was conducted under ventilation conditions (3.5 ACH) Duggan, 1984; Reitze et al., 1972; Sawyer, 1977). These
considered to be representative of indoor conditions in studies are summarized in Table 4 and described below. Of
residential structures and some commercial settings, but it these studies, only one (Reitze et al. 1972) reported data at a
is likely to be on the lower end of the ventilation range for sufficient number of points in time (at least 3), and with a
many industrial settings. A dilution ventilation rate of 3.5 sufficient number of sample results per time point (at least 3) to
ACH, without consideration of FS or other removal mech- reliably determine the time to 99% removal using an
anisms, is expected to yield 99% fiber removal by about exponential decay curve. The remainder of the studies
80 min, which was 2.5-fold longer than for the measured data. provided sufficient information to estimate the mean percent
For the experimental conditions of this study, observed decrease in concentration during the FS periods (Table 4).
non-ventilation effects (e.g. agglomeration, impaction) These studies were helpful for the purposes of comparison to
appeared to have a larger impact on fiber removal than did the data presented, although none of the other identified
ventilation effects (54 min to 99% fiber removal for non- published studies discussed below measured asbestos FS in
ventilation effects versus 79 min for ventilation only effects). repeated events using PCME measurements, as was done in the
These results suggest that even if the current study had been current study.
performed in the absence of ventilation, 99% of the fibers still In 1972, Reitze et al. conducted a study in which they
would have been removed from the air within approximately reported measurements of FS following the spraying of
1 h on average. asbestos insulation. Asbestos fiber type was not specified but
The use of theoretical gravitational settling models appeared to be chrysotile based on the information provided in
without taking into account ventilation yielded unrealistic- the study. The authors reported PCM airborne fiber concen-
ally slow settling rates compared to measured FS rates. trations at 30 and 60 min after insulation spraying operations,
Compared to the measurement-based estimates, the time to but did not report the sample averaging times (see Reitze et al.,
99% fiber removal estimated from gravitational FS calcu- 1972; Table 3). During spraying operations, area samples
lations in the absence of ventilation was more than 7-fold collected between 10 and 75 feet from the spraying measured
longer for the largest fiber sizes evaluated and up to 300- 10–71 f/cc. The room sizes were not specified but were large
fold longer for the smallest fiber sizes evaluated (32 min for enough to allow for sampling at 10, 15, 20, 35, and 75 feet from
measurement-based settling versus 240–9600 min for gravi- the worker conducting the spraying. The ventilation rates were
tational settling; Table 3). Even when gravitational settling also not specified but were reported to have varied during
and dilution ventilation were both accounted for, estimated sampling. At 30 min after spraying ended, concentrations
times to 99% removal were more than 2-fold longer than declined between 1.01 f/cc and 4.22 f/cc and at 60 min,
the measurement-based estimates (32 min versus concentrations declined further between 0.26 f/cc and 0.76
59–79 min). These findings highlight the likely effect of f/cc. To characterize the FS rate of the spray application
other known fiber removal mechanisms including agglom- scenario that Reitze et al. analyzed, the exponential decay
eration, impaction, and adherence to surfaces, rather than curve (Equation 1) was fit to their data. The resulting decay
just gravitational settling. curve was used to determine that the estimated time to
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

Table 4. Comparison of study results to asbestos fiber settling measurements reported in the published literature*.

Concentration data
Estimated time
Mean to 99%
Post-activity concentration ± Mean conc. removal
Activity Fiber type Sample type time (min) n Std. Dev. (f/cc) % decrease [95% CI] (min) Author
Spraying asbestos insulation from Likely chrysotile Area, PCM (45 mm) 0 7 45 ± 25 – 61 [51–77] Reitze et al. (1972)
nozzle, unspecified ventilation 30 4 2.0 ± 1.5 96%
DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216

60 5 0.47 ± 0.21 99%

Removal of dry asbestos-contain- Chrysotile (15%) Area, PCM (45 mm) 0 1 120b – NCa Sawyer (1977)
ing ceiling material, ‘‘quiet’’ 30 1 65b 46%
conditions, or minimal 45 1 40b 67%
ventilation 60 1 25b 79%
120 1 10b 92%
300 1 4b,c 97%c
Dental casting procedure (mold Unspecified Area, PCM 0 2 24 ± 4b – NCa Brune & Beltesbrekke (1981)
dismantling) using asbestos 10 2 1 ± 0b 96%
liner, no local ventilation 30 2 0.25b 499%
Vigorous dust disturbance in Amosite Area, PCM (45 mm) 0 19 0.14 ± 0.19 – NCa Moorcroft & Duggan (1984)
classrooms, unventilated with 45d 19 0.018 ± 0.015 87%
heating system
Resuspension of fibers using brush Amosite Area, PCM (45 mm) 5e 2 0.3 ± 0.2b – NCa Burdett & Stacey (2001)
in small (19 m3) polyethylene 15 2 0.2 ± 0.2b 22%
chamber, no ventilation 25 2 0.1 ± 0.0b 82%
35 2 0.02 ± 0.0b 93%
45 2 0.02 ± 0.0b 93%
55 2 50.01b 497%
Resuspension of fibers using leaf Amosite Area, PCM (45 mm) 5e 2 0.9b – NCa Burdett & Stacey (2001)
blower in small (19 m3) 15 2 0.8b 11%
polyethylene chamber, no 25 2 0.6b 33%
ventilation 35 2 0.4b 55%
55 2 0.5b 44%
Unpacking and repacking boxes of Chrysotile (3–60%) Personal, PCME 0 4f 0.2 ± 0.2 – NCa Madl et al. (2008)
automobile brake shoes and 7.5 4f 0.03 ± 0.04 85%
pads (4 or 16 boxes)
Shake-out and handing of asbestos Grade 7T chrysotile Personal, PCME 0 6 3 (±1.5)g – 32 [22–57] This study
loaded work clothing, 3.5 ACH 2.5 6 1.9 (±1.2) 36%
7.5 6 1.3 (±0.8) 58%
22.5 6 0.5 (±0.3) 86%

*The time to 99% removal was calculated when data were available for 3 or more time points, with 3 or more samples at each time point. The ‘‘time zero’’ concentration represents the airborne concentration
during the activity. The post-activity times are reported as the mid-point of the start and end sampling time. The airborne concentrations were estimated from figures if not reported in the text.
a
NC indicates not calculated.
b
Airborne concentrations estimated from plotted data in figure presented in reference.
c
A sample was also collected 18 h after ceiling removal, but the resolution of the figure was insufficient to estimate the concentration. The authors noted background conditions occurred within 30 h after removal
of the ceiling material.
d
Sampling time midpoint estimated based on an estimated delay of 30 min between sampling periods, and a total sample time of approximately 60 min (total settling time of 90 min). Data shown for 19 events
with data for both dust disturbance and no dust disturbance periods. The detection limit for one sample with no fibers detected was assumed to be 0.001 f/cc based on minimum detected result.
e
Rate of asbestos fiber removal from air

Based on the text, the first 10-min sample appears to include 5 min of brushing or leaf-blowing.
f
The 4 events from Testing II included pads (4 boxes), pads (16 boxes), shoes (4 boxes), and shoes (16 boxes). The first and second 15-min TWA left and right lapel samples were averaged prior to analysis. Box
handling occurred in the first 15-min period. Values in table were calculated from the raw study data and do not appear in Madl et al. (2008).
g
797

Concentration is a weighted average of 0–5 and 0–15 min TWA concentrations. See text.
798 J. Sahmel et al. Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

99% removal from air for this study was 61 min (95% CI: gravitational settling velocity calculations to estimate the
51–77 min). settling rate for fibers with a diameter of 1 mm, and reported
Another study involved collecting airborne fiber meas- that the amount of time needed for 50% of the fibers to settle
urements under ‘‘quiet conditions’’ for a 3-d period (i.e. out of the air would be 120 min, and for 90% of the fibers to
assumed to be minimal ventilation) following removal of settle out of air would be 410 min. For fibers with a diameter
the ceiling material in a building (Sawyer, 1977). PCM of 0.5 mm, the gravitational settling velocity estimates
fiber analyses were combined with polarizing light micros- increased to 480 min for 50% settling and 1600 min for
copy (PLM) rather than the current technique of TEM to 90% settling. Similar to the current study, when Moorcroft
determine asbestos-specific fiber concentrations. It is and Duggan compared these gravitational settling calculations
unknown whether this analytical technique affected the to the samples collected in the field, they noted that airborne
final sample concentration results; this technique was not fiber concentrations declined far more rapidly than the
used in any of the other studies evaluating FS. Sample gravitational settling calculations had predicted. In the
averaging times were not reported. The decrease in fiber samples they collected, less than 25% of the fibers counted
concentration as a function of elapsed time following a had a diameter of greater than 1 mm, and almost all fibers had
20-min removal procedure was provided in a figure in the aspect ratios of greater than 10 to 1. Based on the results of
published study (Sawyer, 1977, Figure 7). Based on the their measurements, they concluded that ‘‘theoretical esti-
provided figure, fiber concentrations appeared to decline mates of the reduction expected from gravitational settling
from a maximum airborne concentration of nearly 120 f/cc and ventilation suggest that these two mechanisms of fiber
to just over 25 f/cc within approximately 1 h, then declined loss from the air were not sufficient to account for all of the
further to approximately 10 f/cc within approximately 2 h, observed reductions in concentrations’’ (Moorcroft &
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

and again to about 4 f/cc by 5 h, ultimately reaching Duggan, 1984, p. 457). Also consistent with the current
background levels (0.02 f/cc) within 30 h. A sample was study, the authors indicated that ‘‘the residence time for the
also collected 18 h after ceiling removal, but the resolution majority of fibers made airborne during our measurements
of the figure was insufficient to estimate the concentration was less than 1 h’’ (Moorcroft & Duggan, 1984, p. 457).
(the concentration appeared to be near 0 f/cc). Although In 2001, the Health and Safety Laboratory in the UK
this study was reportedly conducted under ‘‘quiet condi- reported the results of amosite FS measurements collected in
tions’’, it is unclear what these conditions were. Another a small chamber with polyethylene walls measuring
limitation of the study is that only one sample was taken at 2.5 2.5 3 meters with no ventilation (Burdett & Stacey,
each time point. It is also unknown what happened to fiber 2001). To measure FS, the authors reported that the fibers
concentrations between 5 h and 18 h post disturbance, since were made airborne by brushing the walls of the chamber
no additional samples were collected during this period; with a hand brush for 5 min. Following the end of the
concentrations could have declined more rapidly than disturbance, the authors reported that PCM airborne fiber
depicted (Sawyer, 1977; Figure 7). And, finally, it is concentrations had been reduced by a factor of 50% after
unknown just how far above the reported background level about 10 min and subsequently decreased by over 90% after
(0.02 f/cc) the fiber concentrations remained between the 30 min, which was very similar to the decreases in
5 and 30 h time points (Sawyer, 1977; Table 2). concentrations observed in the measured data presented in
A simple study was conducted by Brune and Beltesbrekke this study. In a related test with a leaf blower, by the same
in 1981 where the airborne concentrations of an unknown authors, it was reported that 40% of the amosite fibers settled
asbestos fiber type were measured in a laboratory during out in the first 60 min. There was some discrepancy between
dental casting procedures using an asbestos liner. The the authors’ description of the data and the report figures
laboratory was not equipped with local exhaust ventilation. (Burdett & Stacey 2001; Figures 9 and 10); the data from the
Samples were collected during the dismantling of the mold figures is summarized in Table 4. It is difficult to extrapolate
and during two periods after the task ended, and were the results of settling from this study to other situations (or
analyzed using PCM. Sample averaging times were not more generally) because of the small chamber size and the
indicated. Reported airborne fiber concentrations of 21 f/cc polyethylene walls used in the chamber. Known adherence
and 27 f/cc were measured during the mold dismantling task. properties of fibers to plastic compared to the wall surfaces in
As depicted in the study (Brune & Beltesbrekke, 1981; a typical room are likely to have influenced the results. In
Figure 4), after approximately 10 min following cessation of addition, the rate of decay in concentration should be
the mold dismantling, measured concentrations dropped to interpreted with caution because the airborne concentration
approximately 1 f/cc. Concentrations appeared to decline to during the fiber release activity was not reported by the
approximately 0.25 f/cc after 30 min (Brune & Beltesbrekke, authors. Based on the text, the duration of the suspension
1981). Qualitatively, the rate of decay in airborne concentra- activity appears to be 5 min versus sampling durations
tions appeared very similar to those observed in our study. of 10 min.
Moorcroft & Duggan (1984) measured airborne amosite In 2008, researchers reported air concentration data that
concentrations using PCM in four classrooms with no are useful for assessing FS rates as part of a simulation study
mechanical ventilation during a period of vigorous dust characterizing airborne chrysotile concentrations involving
disturbance, and then again approximately 15–75 min after the unpacking and repacking of unused chrysotile-containing
the dust disturbance had ended (the sample duration was automotive brake components (Madl et al., 2008). Short term
approximately 1 h with 5–30 min between sampling periods). personal samples analyzed by PCME characterized a 15-min
Prior to conducting the measurements, the authors used period of active component handling followed by 15 min of
DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216 Rate of asbestos fiber removal from air 799

inactivity. A total of four events with active and inactive motion, and diffusion (Corn, 1961a,b; Drinker & Hatch,
periods were simulated using either 4 or 16 boxes of brake 1954; Hinds, 1982; Zimon & Corn, 1969). In 1982, Hinds
pads or shoe components with average bulk chrysotile stated that ‘‘Aerosol particles will attach firmly to any surface
concentrations between 31 and 36% by weight. The study they contact’’ and indicated that when particles contact one
was conducted in a 2054 m3 unventilated (0.83 air changes another, they will readily form clumps or larger masses in the
per hour) automotive repair shop with all entry and service air (Hinds, 1982, p. 127). According to Reist, in more
doors closed. During first the 15-min period of active turbulent airflows, such as what would be expected in a
component handling, the average personal airborne chrysotile typical workplace, particles are likely to be removed from the
concentration was 0.2 f/cc (range: 0.030 f/cc to 0.541 f/cc). air by mechanisms other than settling (Reist, 1984). Drinker
Concentrations decreased on average by 85% during the and Hatch indicated that diffusion is the primary method by
second 15-min period to 0.03 f/cc (range: 0.001 f/cc to 0.097 which micron-sized particles are removed from the air. In
f/cc) (raw data requested and received from study authors diffusion, particle momentum is reduced by the slower
for this comparative analysis). The observed 85% reduction moving air boundary at the surface of larger objects, and
is consistent with the 58% and 86% reduction rates ultimately results in particle adherence. Further, the small size
observed during the first and second 15-min FS periods in of these particles causes them to be affected by the viscous
the current study. forces of air, and significantly reduces the distance that they
Evaluation of the studies presented in Table 4 showed that are able to travel (Hinds, 1982). Zimon reported that van der
despite potentially large differences in workplace conditions, Waals forces, capillary forces due to the cohesion of water
sizes, and ventilation rates, as well as differences in fiber type molecules in the air, and electrification are all important
and likely differences in PCM fiber dimension profiles, factors in the adhesion of particles to surfaces and to each
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

the measured decreases in airborne PCM fiber concentrations other (Zimon & Corn, 1969). As evaluated by Zimon, relative
in the published literature were consistent across all studies humidity levels above 65% in air can also result in increasing
(within the same order of magnitude). Sawyer (1977) reported adhesion of particles to surfaces and to each other. Relative
results that appeared less consistent compared to the other humidities above this level were not observed in the current
five studies, but previously described questions about this study, as reported in the methods section. Zimon also
study make it difficult to directly evaluate the results reported an increase in adhesive forces on a particle as
compared to the other studies. Further, the results of Sawyer the size decreases, and further stated that for particles in
(1977) did show significant reductions in fiber concentrations the microscopic range, the variability in adhesive forces
over 1 h, consistent with the other studies. Fiber removal rates among particles was no larger than approximately 20%,
were similar between studies that measured amosite com- and was much lower for smaller particle sizes (Zimon &
pared to chrysotile, and, consistent with the current study, Corn, 1969).
both Moorcroft & Duggan (1984) and Burdett & Stacey Regarding fibrous shapes, Zimon stated that, ‘‘In addition
(2001) reported data indicating that a majority of amosite to the shapes already mentioned, there are also particles of
fiber removal occurred within 60 min, depending on the fibrous or acircular form (prisms, needles, fibers, etc.) having
scenario. In a more formal comparative analysis of the data in one dimension greatly exceeding others. These include
the current study and Reitze et al. (1972), which had particles of zinc oxide, asbestos, tobacco virus, etc. We
sufficient measurement data to reliably fit an exponential should expect that the adhesive force of acircular particles
decay curve to the airborne concentration results over time, would be greater than that of plane and isometric ones, owing
the observed time to 99% removal from air ranged from to the greater area of contact of the particles with the surface’’
approximately 20 to 80 min. Differences in the mean time to (Zimon & Corn, 1969, p. 93).
99% fiber removal between this study (32 min) and the Reitze The findings of our study are strongly supported by the
study (61 min) could have been affected by the specificity of work of Drinker and Hatch, Corn, Hinds, Reist, and Zimon,
the analytical method for asbestos fibers used in the studies; all of whom have concluded that there are many factors other
the current study used the PCME method, which reported than gravitational settling and ventilation that can influence
only airborne chrysotile concentrations in the size range the rate of particle and fiber settling. Existing models which
of interest, compared to the PCM method used in the rely heavily on either gravitational settling velocity or
Reitze study, which reported all airborne fibers in the size ventilation alone, or even these two factors together, are
range of interest. overly simplistic for estimating the residence time of fibers in
air and appear likely to overestimate (at times dramatically)
the amount of time that fibers, particularly those in the PCM
Fiber removal mechanisms from air: previous findings
size range, will remain airborne.
and future research priorities
It is important to consider some of the factors that
Overall, the results of the analyses conducted in this study may be worthy of further evaluation based on the results
point to the influence of factors other than dilution ventilation of this study. Going forward, it would be desirable if
and gravitational settling in the removal of asbestos fibers some of the models which have been used in recent years
from air. Researchers initially identified some of these could incorporate correction factors to account for those
mechanisms of particle removal from air as early as the additional fiber removal factors beyond gravitational
1950s (Drinker & Hatch, 1954). Lists of these factors often settling and ventilation, as these other factors appear
include van der Waals forces, electrification, impaction on to have a strong effect on the rate of FS. While the
other bodies, centrifugation, agglomeration, Brownian Drivas et al. (1996) model is an example of a model that
800 J. Sahmel et al. Inhal Toxicol, 2015; 27(14): 787–801

begins to take some of these factors into account, it could Declaration of interest
be helpful to further refine and validate this model
The authors’ affiliations are as shown on the cover page. All of
specifically for use with fibers. Additional measurements
the authors are employed by Cardno ChemRisk, a consulting
of fiber removal under a variety of airborne concentrations
firm that performs scientific research and support for the
and ventilation conditions would allow better characteriza-
government, corporations, law firms, and various scientific/
tion of the impact of these factors and help to improve the
professional organizations. The underlying data used in this
ability of existing models to more accurately predict fiber
analysis were generated from a study that was partially funded
removal rates.
by John Crane, Inc., a manufacturer of sealing devices which
historically manufactured or supplied asbestos-containing
Conclusions gaskets and packing. Cardno ChemRisk has been engaged by
John Crane, Inc., as well as other corporations, to provide
This study is the first known research to specifically assess
general consulting, expert advice, and litigation support on
the airborne settling rate of asbestos-specific fibers in the
scientific matters involving asbestos. The analysis reported in
relevant size range of interest to human health (i.e. 5 mm
this article and the work associated with preparing this
in length and 0.25 mm in width with a 3:1 or greater aspect
manuscript for publication was conceived and funded entirely
ratio, or PCME, according to regulatory agencies such as
by Cardno ChemRisk. This paper was prepared and written
OSHA). There were several important conclusions reached
exclusively by the authors without any review or input by John
following the data analysis in this study. First, the measured
Crane, Inc. employees or legal counsel, or any other outside
rate of asbestos fiber removal was faster than what was
source. Four of the authors (D.J.P., J.L.H., J.S., A.K.M.) have
predicted by gravitational settling models commonly used by
served as expert witnesses regarding historical exposures of
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

human exposure assessment and industrial hygiene profes-

various tradesmen to asbestos.
sionals, particularly when these models included an assump-
tion of limited or no ventilation. Such models do not
account for a number of the major fiber removal mechan-
isms and conditions that have been shown to substantially References
influence the rate of FS (including agglomeration, diffusion, ATSDR. (2001). Toxicological profile for asbestos. Atlanta, GA: U.S.
and electrostatic charge). These models are therefore likely Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Public
Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
to predict FS times that are longer (or much longer) than (ATSDR).
what has been measured in this study and other published Berman DW. (2010). Comparing milled fiber, Quebec ore, and textile
studies reporting FS measurements in the literature. Second, factory dust: has another piece of the asbestos puzzle fallen into
room ventilation has been shown to be an important factor place? Crit Rev Toxicol 40:151–88.
Bragg GM, van Zuiden L, Hermance CE. (1974). The free fall of
with respect to the rate of fiber removal. For scenarios cylinders at intermediate Reynold’s numbers. Atmos Environ 8:
where the dilution ventilation rate is 3–4 ACH, it was 755–64.
estimated that the impact of ventilation was similar to but Brune D, Beltesbrekke H. (1981). Levels of methylmethacrylate,
formaldehyde, and asbestos in dental workroom air. Scand J Dent
slightly less than other removal mechanisms. The use of
Res 89:113–16.
settling models with zero ventilation, which is not repre- Burdett G, Stacey PR. (2001). Improved methods for clearance testing
sentative of the vast majority of work or home environ- and visual assessment of asbestos removal operations. HSL/2001/11,
ments, resulted in unrealistically long estimates of FS times. Sheffield, Health and Safety Laboratory.
Corn M. (1961a). The adhesion of solid particles to solid surfaces. I. A
And third, the measured removal rate from air in this study review. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 11:523–8.
for asbestos-specific fibers in the size range of interest (i.e. Corn M. (1961b). The adhesion of solid particles to solid surfaces. II. A
PCME fibers) was consistent with what has been observed review. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 11:566–75.
in prior peer-reviewed studies, despite the measurement of Corn, M, Stein, F. (1966). Mechanism of dust redispersion. In: Fish BR
(ed.). Surface contamination. Gatlinburg, TN: Pergamon Press,
all fibers rather than asbestos-only fibers in those studies Oxford, 45–54.
(PCM fibers). Based on the current and previous research, a Davis JM, Beckett ST, Bolton RE, et al. (1978). Mass and number of
reasonable estimate of the time necessary for the removal of fibres in the pathogenesis of asbestos-related lung disease in rats. Br J
99% of relevant fibers from air ranged from approximately Cancer 37:673–88.
Donovan EP, Donovan BL, Sahmel J, et al. (2011). Evaluation of
20 to 80 min. For the chrysotile fibers specifically measured bystander exposures to asbestos in occupational settings: a review of
in this study, the time for 99% removal was a half hour the literature and application of a simple eddy diffusion model. Crit
(mean of 32 min; 95% CI: 22–57 min). This research has Rev Toxicol 41:52–74.
important implications for improving the accuracy of human Drinker P, Hatch T. (1954). Industrial dust, hygienic significance,
measurement, and control. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
health exposure and risk assessment efforts for airborne Drivas PJ, Valberg PA, Murphy BL, Wilson R. (1996). Modeling indoor
asbestos. air exposure from short-term point source releases. Indoor Air 6:
271–7.
ERG (Eastern Research Group). (2003a). Report on the expert panel on
Acknowledgements health effects of asbestos and synthetic vitreous fibers: the influence
of fiber length. Prepared for the Agency for Toxic Substances and
The authors would like to thank and acknowledge Tony Disease Registry (ATSDR), Division of Health Assessment and
Havics, Shannon Gaffney, James Keenan, Joshua Maskrey, Consultation. 68-C-98-148. March 17, 2003. Lexington, MA: Eastern
Research Group.
Lauren Spicer, Gretchen DeRose, Rich Lee, Drew Van Orden, ERG (Eastern Research Group). (2003b). Report on the peer consultation
Matthew Sanchez, and Matthew Zock for their support and workshop to discuss a proposed protocol to assess asbestos-related
assistance in completing this study. risk. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2015.1110216 Rate of asbestos fiber removal from air 801
(USEPA), Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. May 30, OSHA. (1997). Method ID-160: asbestos in air. Washington, DC: U.S.
2003. Lexington, MA: Eastern Research Group. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Esmen NA. (1996). Adhesion and aerodynamic resuspension of fibrous (OSHA).
particles. J Environ Eng 122:379–83. Platek SF, Groth DH, Ulrich CE, et al. (1985). Chronic inhalation of
Hinds, WC. (1982). Aerosol technology: properties, behavior, and short asbestos fibers. Fundam Appl Toxicol 5:327–40.
measurement of airborne particles. New York, NY: Wiley. Reist, PC. (1984). Introduction to aerosol science. New York, NY:
Hinds, WC. (1999). Aerosol technology: properties, behavior, and Macmillan.
measurement of airborne particles. New York, NY: Wiley. Reitze WB, Nicholson WJ, Holaday DA, Selikoff IJ. (1972). Application
IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). (2012). Chemical of sprayed inorganic fiber containing asbestos: occupational health
agents and related occupations. Lyon: International Agency for hazards. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 33:178–91.
Research on Cancer. Sahmel J, Barlow CA, Simmons B, et al. (2014). Evaluation of take-
Keil CB. (2000). A tiered approach to deterministic models for indoor air home exposure and risk associated with the handling of
exposures. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 15:145–51. clothing contaminated with chrysotile asbestos. Risk Anal 34:
Keil, CB, Simmons, CE, Anthony, TR. (2009). Mathematical models for 1448–68.
estimating occupational exposure. Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Sahmel J, Barlow CA, Gaffney SH, et al. (2015). Airborne asbestos take-
Hygiene Association Press. home exposures during handling of chrysotile-contaminated clothing
Madl AK, Scott LL, Murbach DM, et al. (2008). Exposure to chrysotile following simulated full shift workplace exposures. J Exp Sci Environ
asbestos associated with unpacking and repacking boxes of automo- Epidemiol. Advance online publication, April 29, 2015. doi:
bile brake pads and shoes. Ann Occup Hyg 52:463–79. 101.1038/jes.2015.15.
Mann, EL. (1983). Asbestos. In: Lefond SJ (ed.) Industrial minerals and Sawyer RN. (1977). Asbestos exposure in a Yale building. Analysis and
rocks. 5th ed. New York, NY: Society Mining Engineers of the resolution. Environ Res 13:146–69.
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Sawyer, RN, Spooner, CM. (1978). Sprayed asbestos-containing material
Engineers, 435–84. in buildings. A guidance document, Part 2. Research Triangle Park,
Moorcroft JS, Duggan MJ. (1984). Rate of decline of asbestos fibre NC: United States Environmental Protection Agency.
concentration in room air. Ann Occup Hyg 28:453–7. Stanton MF. (1973). Some etiological considerations of fibre carcino-
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:21 07 July 2016

Nicas M. (2001). Modeling turbulent diffusion and advection of indoor genesis. In: Bogovski P, Wilson JC, Timbrell V, Wagner JC. (eds.)
air contaminants by Markov chains. AIHAJ 62:149–58. Biological effects of asbestos: proceedings of a working conference.
Nicas, M. (2011). Mathematical modeling of indoor air con- Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), 289–94.
Stanton MF, Layard M, Tegeris A, et al. (1977). Carcinogenicity of
taminant concentrations. In: Rose VE, Cohrssen B (eds.) Patty’s
fibrous glass: pleural response in the rat in relation to fiber dimension.
industrial hygiene. 6th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
J Natl Cancer Inst 58:587–603.
661–94.
Stettler LE, Sharpnack DD, Krieg EF. (2008). Chronic inhalation
NIOSH. (1994a). NIOSH method 7402. Asbestos by transmission
of short asbestos: lung fiber burdens and histopathology for
electron microscopy (TEM). NIOSH Manual of Analytical Methods.
monkeys maintained for 11.5 years after exposure. Inhal Toxicol 20:
Washington, DC: National Institute for Occupational Safety and
63–73.
Health. Timbrell V. (1965). Human exposure to asbestos: dust controls and
NIOSH. (1994b). NIOSH method 7400. Asbestos and other fibers by standards. The inhalation of fibrous dusts. Ann N Y Acad Sci 132:
phase contrast microscopy. NIOSH Manual of Analytical 255–73.
Methods. Cincinnati, OH: National Institute for Occupational Safety USEPA. (1986). Guidance for preventing asbestos disease among
and Health. auto mechanics. EPA-560-OPTS-86-002. June 1986. Washington,
NIOSH. (2008). Revised draft, NIOSH current intelligence bulletin, DC: Asbestos Action Program, U.S. Environmental Protection
asbestos fibers and other elongated mineral particles: state of the Agency.
science and roadmap for research. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Dept. of USEPA. (2000). RISK model version 1.5 documentation. US
Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Available from: http://
Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health www.epa.gov/nrmrl/appcd/mmd/iaq.html.
(NIOSH). Virta RL. (2006). Worldwide asbestos supply and consumption trends
NRC. (1981). Indoor pollutants. Committee on Indoor Pollutants Board, from 1900 through 2003. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1298.
Toxicology and Environmental Health Hazards, Assembly of Life Reston, VA: U.S. Geological Survey, p. 2.
Sciences National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Zimon, AD, Corn, M. (1969). Adhesion of dust and powder. New York,
Academy Press. NY: Plenum Press.

Supplementary material available online