On-site comparison of the OSHA 47, Asset EZ4-NCO, Iso-Chek, DAN, and CIP10 methods for measuring methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) at an oriented-strand board (OSB) factory

Abstract

Diisocyanates are occupational contaminants and known sensitizers causing irritation (skin and respiratory tract) as well as occupational asthma. Because of their physicochemical properties (semi-volatile and high reactivity) and low occupational limits, diisocyanate exposure evaluation is still a challenge nowadays for industrial hygienists and laboratories. The objective of this study was to compare the methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) concentrations measured by five methods using different collection or derivatization approaches in an oriented-strand board (OSB) factory. The methods used were: OSHA 47 (filter, 1-(2-pyridyl)piperazine) (OSHA), Asset EZ4-NCO (denuder and filter, dibutylamine) (Asset), Iso-Chek (double-filter, 9-(N-methylaminomethyl) anthracene and 1,2-methoxyphenylpiperazine), DAN (filter, 1,8-diaminonaphthalene), and CIP10 (centrifugation, 1,2-methoxyphenylpiperazine). Real-time monitoring of particle concentration and size distribution was performed to explain the potential bias between methods. The comparison study was performed over 3 consecutive days, generating at least 18 replicates for each of the 5 methods. The results of each methods were compared using linear mixed effect modeling. Compared to Asset, which yielded the highest concentrations overall, the OSHA method provided the smallest bias with −18% (95% CI [-61;24]) (not significant) for MDI monomer and the DAN method provided the smallest bias with −30 (95% CI [–70;9]) (not significant) for Total Reactive Isocyanate Group (TRIG). The CIP10 and Iso-Chek methods provided the largest biases for MDI monomer (–83% (95% CI [–115;–51]) and −78% (95% CI [–110;–46]), respectively) as well as for TRIG (–87% (95% CI [–120;–55]) and −75% (95% CI [–107;–44]), respectively). The underestimations of the CIP10 and Iso-Chek were explained by its inefficient sampling principle for fines particles and the use of a non-impregnated filter to collect aerosol MDI, respectively. This study confirms that impregnated filter, including denuding device such as the Asset EZ4-NCO sampler, collects the MDI-coated wood particles and MDI vapor with similar efficiency. It also demonstrates for the first time in this type of MDI emission a significant agreement for TRIG concentration between the DAN method in the impregnated filter configuration and an international standard one such as Asset.

Keywords:

• Air sampling
• derivatization
• method comparison
• semi-volatiles
• TRIG
• wood particles

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Lucile Richard and Francois Gouin who helped with the sample collection and some laboratory analysis. Our thanks also go to the workplace who opened their doors to us for the field sampling, and finally, to the IRSST and International Isocyanate Institute for their instrumental and financial support.

Additional information

Funding

This project was supported by grants from the IRSST and the International Isocyanate Institute.