| 家具制造过程中VOCs的来源分析及环境健康风险评价 |
| 摘要点击 2958 全文点击 1029 投稿时间：2017-10-17 修订日期：2017-11-06 |
| 查看HTML全文
查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 中文关键词 VOCs 家具制造 来源 致癌概率风险 非致癌概率风险 |
| 英文关键词 VOCs furniture manufacturing source carcinogenic probabilistic risk non-carcinogenic probabilistic risk |
|
| 中文摘要 |
| 目前国内外仅对家具生产中涂装环节VOCs的来源进行分析，且主要关注的是家具制造完成之后释放的VOCs及其对室内空气的影响，因此本文对完整家具制造过程中VOCs的来源进行探究，并引入蒙特卡罗模拟方法，运用改进的概率风险评估模型，对家具制造过程中贴皮、喷底漆、喷面漆、清洗、喷胶、粘棉、巡检等工序9个工位的工人进行致癌和非致癌健康风险评价，并筛选出对健康风险影响较大的暴露参数.结果表明，喷底漆、喷面漆工序使用的各类油漆、稀释剂和固化剂会产生苯、甲苯、二甲苯、苯乙烯、丁酮、环己酮、乙酸丁酯、乙酸乙酯等VOCs，贴皮工序、喷胶工序、粘棉工序使用的胶水类化学原料会产生二氯甲烷和乙酸乙酯，清洗工序用到的脱漆剂会产生二氯甲烷；暴露于苯和二氯甲烷的各工位致癌风险值均超过10-6，除暴露于苯的擦色、喷底漆和巡检工位外，其它各工位超过10-6的概率皆大于95%，喷面漆工人的苯致癌风险最大，为3.07×10-6±1.73×10-6，贴皮工人的二氯甲烷致癌风险最大，为5.14×10-6±2.70×10-6，另外，各工位中只有喷面漆工人的非致癌风险大于1；暴露持续时间（ED）、致癌物的浓度（C）、呼吸速率（InhR）、暴露时间（ET）、暴露频率（EF）是对致癌风险影响较大的参数，体重（BW）对致癌风险具有负敏感度.除浓度外，对非致癌风险结果影响较大的暴露参数依次为：暴露持续时间（ED）、暴露时间（ET）、暴露频率（EF）. |
| 英文摘要 |
| Regarding furniture manufacturing, scholars have only studied the sources of VOCs in the spraying process, yet the main concern is the release of VOCs after the completion of the manufacturing process and its impact on indoor air quality. Therefore, in this study, the sources of VOCs for the entire process of furniture manufacturing were explored and probabilistic risk models were improved. Then, the carcinogenicity and non-carcinogenic health risks to workers at nine workstations in a furniture factory were evaluated via a Monte Carlo simulation method, and the sensitivity of each exposure parameter was analyzed. The results are as follows. The various types of paints, diluents, and curing agents used in the process of spraying primer paint and spraying surface paint release VOCs, such as benzene, toluene, xylene, styrene, butanone, cyclohexanone, butyl acetate, and ethyl acetate. The glue used in the leather pasting process, the glue process, and the viscose process generates VOCs, such as dichloromethane and ethyl acetate, and the paint remover used in the cleaning process emits dichloromethane. The carcinogenic risk at each station was more than 10-6. For benzene exposure, the probability of exceeding 10-6 was greater than 95% for all stations, excluding SWB, SWP, and CWP. The carcinogenicrisk of workers exposed to benzene was the highest at SWS, at 3.07×10-6±1.73×10-6, and the carcinogenicrisk of workers exposed to dichloromethane was the greatest at SWL, with a value of 5.14×10-6±2.70×10-6. The only non-carcinogenicrisk greater than 1 was to SWS workers. The parameters that had the greatest impact on the carcinogenic risk assessment were exposure day (ED), concentration (C), exposure time (ET), and exposure frequency (EF). In the non-carcinogenic risk assessment, the most influential variables were ED, ET, and EF. In addition, concentration also had a significant impact on the evaluation results. |
|
|
|
