Araceli Sánchez-Jiménez

Publications of Araceli Sánchez-Jiménez

• Oil mist and vapour concentrations from drilling fluids: inter- and intra-laboratory comparison of chemical analyses.

  Authors: Karen S Galea, Alison Searl, Araceli Sánchez-Jiménez, Torill Woldbæk, Kristin Halgard, Syvert Thorud, Kjersti Steinsvåg, Kirsti Krüger, Laura Maccalman, John W Cherrie, Martie van Tongeren

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 09/2011; 56(1):61-9.

  There are no recognized analytical methods for measuring oil mist and vapours arising from drilling fluids used in offshore petroleum drilling industry. To inform the future development of improvedThere are no recognized analytical methods for measuring oil mist and vapours arising from drilling fluids used in offshore petroleum drilling industry. To inform the future development of improved methods of analysis for oil mist and vapours this study assessed the inter- and intra-laboratory variability in oil mist and vapour analysis. In addition, sample losses during transportation and storage were assessed. Replicate samples for oil mist and vapour were collected using the 37-mm Millipore closed cassette and charcoal tube assembly. Sampling was conducted in a simulated shale shaker room, similar to that found offshore for processing drilling fluids. Samples were analysed at two different laboratories, one in Norway and one in the UK. Oil mist samples were analysed using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), while oil vapour samples were analysed by gas chromatography (GC). The comparison of replicate samples showed substantial within- and between-laboratory variability in reported oil mist concentrations. The variability in oil vapour results was considerably reduced compared to oil mist, provided that a common method of calibration and quantification was adopted. The study also showed that losses can occur during transportation and storage of samples. There is a need to develop a harmonized method for the quantification of oil mist on filter and oil vapour on charcoal supported by a suitable proficiency testing scheme for laboratories involved in the analysis of occupational hygiene samples for the petroleum industry. The uncertainties in oil mist and vapour measurement have substantial implications in relation to compliance with occupational exposure limits and also in the reliability of any exposure-response information reported in epidemiological studies.

• Comparison of the SidePak personal monitor with the Aerosol Particle Sizer (APS).

  Authors: Araceli Sánchez Jiménez, Martie van Tongeren, Karen S Galea, Kjersti Steinsvåg, Laura MacCalman, John W Cherrie

  Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM. 06/2011; 13(6):1841-6.

  The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the TSI Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS) and the TSI portable photometer SidePak to measure airborne oil mist particulate matter (PM) withThe aim of this study was to compare the performance of the TSI Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS) and the TSI portable photometer SidePak to measure airborne oil mist particulate matter (PM) with aerodynamic diameters below 10 μm, 2.5 μm and 1 μm (PM(10), PM(2.5) and PM(1)). Three SidePaks each fitted with either a PM(10), PM(2.5) or a PM(1) impactor and an APS were run side by side in a controlled chamber. Oil mist from two different mineral oils and two different drilling fluid systems commonly used in offshore drilling technologies were generated using a nebulizer. Compared to the APS, the SidePaks overestimated the concentration of PM(10) and PM(2.5) by one order of magnitude and PM(1) concentrations by two orders of magnitude after exposure to oil mist for 3.3-6.5 min at concentrations ranging from 0.003 to 18.1 mg m(-3) for PM(10), 0.002 to 3.96 mg m(-3) for PM(2.5) and 0.001 to 0.418 mg m(-3) for PM(1) (as measured by the APS). In a second experiment a SidePak monitor previously exposed to oil mist overestimated PM(10) concentrations by 27% compared to measurements from another SidePak never exposed to oil mist. This could be a result of condensation of oil mist droplets in the optical system of the SidePak. The SidePak is a very useful instrument for personal monitoring in occupational hygiene due to its light weight and quiet pump. However, it may not be suitable for the measurement of particle concentrations from oil mist.

• Effect of drilling fluid systems and temperature on oil mist and vapour levels generated from shale shaker.

  Authors: Kjersti Steinsvåg, Karen S Galea, Kirsti Krüger, Vegard Peikli, Araceli Sánchez-Jiménez, Esther Sætvedt, Alison Searl, John W Cherrie, Martie van Tongeren

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 01/2011; 55(4):347-56.

  Workers in the drilling section of the offshore petroleum industry are exposed to air pollutants generated by drilling fluids. Oil mist and oil vapour concentrations have been measured in theWorkers in the drilling section of the offshore petroleum industry are exposed to air pollutants generated by drilling fluids. Oil mist and oil vapour concentrations have been measured in the drilling fluid processing areas for decades; however, little work has been carried out to investigate exposure determinants such as drilling fluid viscosity and temperature. A study was undertaken to investigate the effect of two different oil-based drilling fluid systems and their temperature on oil mist, oil vapour, and total volatile organic compounds (TVOC) levels in a simulated shale shaker room at a purpose-built test centre. Oil mist and oil vapour concentrations were sampled simultaneously using a sampling arrangement consisting of a Millipore closed cassette loaded with glass fibre and cellulose acetate filters attached to a backup charcoal tube. TVOCs were measured by a PhoCheck photo-ionization detector direct reading instrument. Concentrations of oil mist, oil vapour, and TVOC in the atmosphere surrounding the shale shaker were assessed during three separate test periods. Two oil-based drilling fluids, denoted 'System 2.0' and 'System 3.5', containing base oils with a viscosity of 2.0 and 3.3-3.7 mm(2) s(-1) at 40°C, respectively, were used at temperatures ranging from 40 to 75°C. In general, the System 2.0 yielded low oil mist levels, but high oil vapour concentrations, while the opposite was found for the System 3.5. Statistical significant differences between the drilling fluid systems were found for oil mist (P = 0.025),vapour (P < 0.001), and TVOC (P = 0.011). Increasing temperature increased the oil mist, oil vapour, and TVOC levels. Oil vapour levels at the test facility exceeded the Norwegian oil vapour occupational exposure limit (OEL) of 30 mg m(-3) when the drilling fluid temperature was ≥50°C. The practice of testing compliance of oil vapour exposure from drilling fluids systems containing base oils with viscosity of ≤2.0 mm(2) s(-1) at 40°C against the Norwegian oil vapour OEL is questioned since these base oils are very similar to white spirit. To reduce exposures, relevant technical control measures in this area are to cool the drilling fluid <50°C before it enters the shale shaker units, enclose shale shakers and related equipment, in addition to careful consideration of which fluid system to use.

• Protecting respiratory health: what should be the constituents of an effective RPE programme?

  Authors: Richard Graveling, Araceli Sánchez-Jiménez, Craig Lewis, Sheila Groat

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 01/2011; 55(3):230-8.

  Although personal respiratory protection is widely recognized as having a lower priority than reduction of any risk at source, respiratory protective equipment (RPE) is a major part of riskAlthough personal respiratory protection is widely recognized as having a lower priority than reduction of any risk at source, respiratory protective equipment (RPE) is a major part of risk management for many employers. We have identified the key elements of what constitutes an effective risk control programme involving RPE, through a 3-fold approach involving (i) a review of the published scientific literature, (ii) exploring the issue through >40 years of research publications from the Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM) (in which the ergonomics of personal protection equipment has been a significant thread), and (iii) a series of interviews and discussions with IOM and Health and Safety Executive staff with experience in the testing, prescription, or use of RPE. We have used the findings to formulate a series of recommendations for the constituents of an effective RPE programme. The role of management is paramount in recognizing the need for and providing appropriate RPE, which is both technically and ergonomically effective. Only then does any focus on the role of the employee, in wearing the RPE correctly at the appropriate times, becomes viable.