As you work with metalworking fluids (MWFs), you may be exposed to various health risks, including skin disorders and respiratory problems. One crucial aspect of minimizing these risks is understanding how MWFs interact with the personal protective equipment (PPE) you wear, such as gloves. In this study, we investigate the permeation of a complex, water-insoluble straight oil MWF through both a disposable and a chemically protective nitrile glove. By analyzing the permeation parameters using a combination of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and gravimetry, we aim to provide valuable insights into the performance of these gloves and inform your decisions about their use in occupational settings.
Background
To understand the importance of evaluating the permeation of metalworking fluids (MWFs) through gloves, it is vital to recognize the widespread use of MWFs in various industries and their potential health risks.
Metalworking fluids and their uses
One of the primary applications of MWFs is in machining processes, where they improve performance and prolong tool life by lubricating, cooling, and removing debris from the workpiece and tool. There are four main types of MWFs: straight oil, soluble oil, semisynthetic, and synthetic, each with its unique composition and properties.
Professionals within metalworking industries looking for high-performance cutting fluids.
- High-Quality Cutting Performance: assist in drilling, tapping, and other metalworking operations seamlessly.
- Long-Lasting Effectiveness: helps extend the longevity of drill bits and cutting tools.
- Ease of Use: cutting fluid simplifies the metalworking process, making drilling and tapping smoother and more efficient.
- Cooling Properties: keeping tools cool during cutting, improving the overall efficiency and lifespan of equipment.
Health risks associated with metalworking fluids
For workers handling MWFs, the exposure to these fluids can lead to various health problems, including skin disorders, respiratory issues, and concerns about carcinogenicity. The major routes of MWF exposure are inhalation and skin contact, making it crucial to wear protective gear, such as gloves, to minimize exposure.
Their composition, often proprietary, makes it challenging to determine the exact health risks associated with MWFs. Furthermore, the complexity of MWFs makes it difficult to quantify exposure, emphasizing the need for studies like the present one to investigate the permeation of MWFs through gloves.
Experimental Methods
The experiments were designed to quantify the permeation parameters of a complex water-insoluble straight oil metalworking fluid (MWF) through nitrile gloves.
Materials and chemicals used
Chemicals and materials used in this study included a straight oil type MWF, Deolene D-4 (D4), purchased from W.S. Dodge Oil (Maywood, CA), and Optima grade hexane from Fisher Scientific (Pittsburgh, PA) used as solvent for all solutions and as the permeation cell collection medium.
Permeation testing procedure
Testing was conducted using the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) F739-99a method with hexane as the collection medium.
To ensure accurate results, the permeation testing procedure involved carefully preparing the MWF and glove samples, assembling the permeation cell, and collecting the permeate samples at regular intervals. The permeation cell was designed to mimic real-world exposure scenarios, and the hexane collection medium was used to facilitate the analysis of the permeated MWF.
Analytical methods used
With the aim of quantifying the permeation parameters of the MWF, analytical methods employed in this study included gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) and gravimetry.
Plus, the combination of chromatography and gravimetry allowed for the detection and quantification of the permeated MWF, providing valuable insights into the permeation properties of the gloves. The GC–MS analysis enabled the identification of the MWF components, while the gravimetric method provided accurate measurements of the permeated MWF amount.
Results
After conducting the permeation tests, the results showed significant differences in the permeation parameters of the two gloves.
Permeation of D4 through Sol-Vex gloves
An analysis of the permeation of D4 through Sol-Vex gloves revealed that less than 34 μg D4/cm2 permeated in 10 h, leading to a time-weighted permeation rate (Pa) of less than 56 ng/cm2/min.
Permeation of D4 through SafeSkin gloves
With regards to the permeation of D4 through SafeSkin gloves, the detection breakthrough time (tdb) was 0.7 ± 0.3 h, the lag time (tl) was 1.6 ± 0.1 h, the diffusion coefficient (D) was (3.7 ± 0.3) × 10−9 cm2/min, and the steady-state permeation rate (Pss) was 3.5 ± 2.2 μg/cm2/min.
Results showed that the chromatogram for the permeate differed from that of the original MWF, resulting from the faster permeation of lower molecular weight congeners.
SAFESKIN Nitrile Gloves
3.8 MIL Safeskin gloves come in a compact "POP-N-GO" pack, making them easy to carry and store. The pack dispenses one glove at a time, maintaining hygiene and preventing waste.
Gloves are suitable for a wide range of applications, including cleaning, gardening, food handling, and first aid.
3.2-mil, The gloves are suitable for a wide range of applications, including food handling, pet care, first aid, hair/beauty, and light-duty cleaning.
Textured Fingertips provides enhanced tactile sensitivity, allowing for better grip and control during tasks.
6.0 MIL, They are designed to withstand tough jobs and resist tearing or punctures, ensuring your hands are protected even when handling sharp objects or rough materials.
Their textured fingertips provide a secure grip, allowing you to maintain control even when working with oily or wet surfaces.
Comparison of permeation parameters
Parameters such as detection breakthrough time, lag time, diffusion coefficient, and steady-state permeation rate were compared between the two gloves. The results are presented in the table below.
| Parameter | Sol-Vex gloves | SafeSkin gloves |
|---|---|---|
| Detection breakthrough time (h) | >10 | 0.7 ± 0.3 |
| Lag time (h) | – | 1.6 ± 0.1 |
| Diffusion coefficient (cm2/min) | – | (3.7 ± 0.3) × 10−9 |
| Steady-state permeation rate (μg/cm2/min) | – | 3.5 ± 2.2 |
Through the comparison of these parameters, it is clear that Sol-Vex gloves offer better protection against D4 permeation than SafeSkin gloves.
Dicussion
Your understanding of the permeation results is crucial in making informed decisions about occupational health and safety.
Interpretation of permeation results
On examining the permeation results, it is evident that the chemically protective Sol-Vex glove provides a higher level of protection against the straight oil metalworking fluid (MWF) compared to the disposable SafeSkin glove. The detection breakthrough time for Sol-Vex was greater than 10 hours, indicating that it can be worn safely for an extended period. In contrast, the detection breakthrough time for SafeSkin was 0.7 ± 0.3 hours, suggesting that it should be worn for only a short duration.
Implications for occupational health and safety
On considering the permeation results, it is clear that the choice of glove plays a critical role in preventing skin contact with MWFs. The use of a chemically protective glove like Sol-Vex can significantly reduce the risk of skin disorders and respiratory problems associated with MWF exposure.
With the permeation parameters obtained in this study, occupational health and safety professionals can make informed decisions about the selection of gloves for workers handling MWFs. For instance, workers who are involved in incidental contact with straight oil MWFs without known carcinogens may wear disposable gloves like SafeSkin for short durations. However, workers who are exposed to MWFs for extended periods or handle carcinogenic MWFs should wear chemically protective gloves like Sol-Vex to minimize the risk of exposure. By selecting the appropriate glove based on the permeation parameters, employers can reduce the risk of occupational diseases and create a safer working environment.
Now, you have seen the results of our study on the permeation of a straight oil metalworking fluid through a disposable and a chemically protective nitrile glove. Our findings suggest that the chemically protective glove is a safer choice, with a detection breakthrough time of over 10 hours, whereas the disposable glove has a detection breakthrough time of 0.7 ± 0.3 hours. This information is crucial for workers who handle metalworking fluids, as it can help them make informed decisions about the type of gloves to wear to minimize their exposure to these potentially hazardous substances.