|
KMID : 0895420090190030213
|
|
Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Enviromental Hygiene
2009 Volume.19 No. 3 p.213 ~ p.232
|
|
|
Review on asbestos analysis
|
|
Ham Seung-Hon
Hwang Sung-Ho
Yoon Chung-Sik
Park Dong-Uk
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
This document was prepared to review and summarize the analytical methods for airborne and bulk asbestos. Basic principles, shortcomings and advantages for asbestos analytical instruments using phase contrast microscopy(PCM), polarized light microscopy(PLM), X-ray diffractometer (XRD), transmission electron microscopy(TEM), scanning electron microscopy(SEM) were reviewed. Both PCM and PLM are principal instrument for airborne and bulk asbestos analysis, respectively. If needed, analytical electron microscopy is employed to confirm asbestos identification. PCM is used originally for workplace airborne asbestos fiber and its application has been expanded to measure airborne fiber. Shortcoming of PCM is that it cannot differentiate true asbestos from non asbestos fiber form and its low resolution limit (0.2~0.25 ㎛). The measurement of airborne asbestos fiber can be performed by EPA’s Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) method, World Health Organization (WHO) method, International Standard Organization (ISO) 10312 method, Japan’s Environmental Asbestos Monitoring method, and Standard method of Indoor Air Quality of Korea. The measurement of airborne asbestos fiber in workplace can be performed by National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 7400 method, NIOSH 7402 method, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) ID-160 method, UK’s Health and Safety Executive(HSE) Methods for the determination of hazardous substances (MDHS) 39/4 method and Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA) CODE-A-1-2004 method of Korea. To analyze the bulk asbestos, stereo microscope (SM) and PLM is required by EPA -600/R-93/116 method. Most bulk asbestos can be identified by SM and PLM but one limitation of PLM is that it can not see very thin fiber (i.e., < 0.25 ㎛). Bulk asbestos analytical methods, including EPA-600/M4-82-020, EPA-600/R-93/116, OSHA ID-191, Laboratory approval program of New York were reviewed. Also, analytical methods for asbestos in soil, dust, water were briefly discussed. Analytical electron microscope, a transmission electron microscope equipped with selected area electron diffraction(SAED) and energy dispersive X-ray analyser(EDXA), has been known to be better to identify asbestiform than scanning electron microscope(SEM). Though there is no standard SEM procedures, SEM is known to be more suitable to analyze long, thin fiber and more cost-effective. Field emission scanning electron microscope (FE-SEM) imaging protocol was developed to identify asbestos fiber. Although many asbestos analytical methods are available, there is no method that can be applied to all type of samples. In order to detect asbestos with confidence, all advantages and disadvantages of each instrument and method for given sample should be considered.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Asbestos, Analysis, PCM, PLM, Risk, TEM, SEM
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|