Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Management Systems
in
Production Engineering
2020, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp. 184-188
Date of submission of the article to the Editor: 01/2020
Date of acceptance of the article by the Editor: 06/2020
DOI 10.2478/mspe-2020-0027
AN EVALUATION OF ON-TOOL SYSTEM FOR SANDING DUST COLLECTION:
PILOT STUDY
Miroslav DADO, Anna LAMPEROVÁ
Technical University in Zvolen
Luboš KOTEK
Brno University of Technology
Richard HNILICA
Technical University in Zvolen
Abstract:
Hazards identification is essential step in framework of occupational health & safety (OH&S) management sys-
tem. The task of spruce wood sanding with hand-held power belt sander is considered as a significant resource
of exposure to wood dust. Dust from spruce wood is hazard that can cause negative health effects such as
asthma and chronic bronchitis. A dust collection box is a commonly used technical measure for reducing expo-
sure to wood dust for this task in practice. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the effectiveness
of commercially available dust collection box at reducing exposure to wood dust during the task of sanding
spruce wood using hand-held power belt sander. Laboratory experiment involved sanding spruce planks
(250 mm × 50 mm × 500 mm) in longitudinal direction using belt sander (Bosch, PBS 75 A) with 120 grit sanding
belt. Spruce dust mass concentrations were sampled using an aerosol monitor (TSI Inc., DustTrak DRX 8533) in
the breathing zone of operator. Inhalable and respirable dust concentrations were both significantly lower
(P < 0.0001) when dust box was attached to belt sander compared with sander without a dust box. Results
from this pilot study indicate that dust collection box is efficient technical measure for decreasing exposure to
aerosol mass concentration during sanding spruce wood with hand-held belt sander.
Key words: belt sander, dust extraction, efficiency
INTRODUCTION
The largest development with occupational health &
safety (OH&S) management systems in the past few years
is the establishment of the international standard ISO
45001:2018 [16, 17, 22]. The aim and intended outcomes
of OH&S management system are to prevent work-re-
lated injury and ill health to workers and to provide safe
and healthy workplaces; consequently, it is critically im-
portant for the organization to eliminate hazards and min-
imize OH&S risks by taking effective preventive and pro-
tective measures [11]. According to ISO 45001:2018 the
organisation should have a process to determine and have
access to health and safety legal requirements applicable
to its OH&S management system. In case of woodworking
companies, one of these legal requirements is also re-
quirement set out in Machinery Directive (2006/42/EC)
concerning risks to health due to the emission of hazard-
ous materials and substances produced by portable hand-
held machinery. Where airborne emissions of wood dust
cannot be sufficiently avoided or reduced, machinery has
to be fitted with the equipment necessary to contain
wood dust in order to protect persons against exposure.
A large amount of dust is generated when sanding wood
with hand-held power belt sander. In Slovakia, occupa-
tional exposure limit (based on an 8-hour time-weighted
average) is 8 mg/m³ for inhalable wood dust except dust
from exotic species (1 mg/m³). Moreover, there is suffi-
cient evidence of carcinogenicity of beech and oak dust.
Prolonged exposure to these dusts could lead to nasal and
sinonasal cancers. Limit value for occupational exposure
to hardwood (beech, oak) dusts is 3 mg/m³. Belt sanders,
because of their particularly high rates of wood removal,
produced the highest dust concentration, typically be-
tween 5 and 10 times greater than concentrations pro-
duced by the orbital sanders [24]. According to [23], de-
terminants that influence the quantity of wood dust pro-
duced concurrently with sanding are density and hardness
of the wood, sandpaper grade and contact pressure.
In selecting the most appropriate methods of reducing
risk of exposure to wood dust, the manufacturer of belt
M. DADO et al. – An Evaluation of On-Tool System for Sanding Dust Collection…
185
sander should take measures to reduce the risks as close
to the emission source as possible. For that reason, most
commercially available belt sanders are equipped with
some sort of dust extraction unit. Dust extraction unit be-
ing either an external one (such as a dust extractor or cen-
tralized exhaust system) or an integral one. Integral dust
extraction unit typically uses a fan indirect driven by the
motor to create suction for the dust collection system.
Dust particles generated at the sanding process are drawn
into housing by an airflow caused by the rotation of the
fan, and they are exhausted from the housing through
duct into the dust collector (such as filter bag, dust box or
container).
Several researchers have examined performance of dust
separation units during grinding metal [2, 5, 13, 21, 27,
29], sandstone [10], concrete [1], stone [10, 14] or sand-
ing drywall [28] and wood [3, 9, 15, 18, 19, 20, 24, 26].
Results from these studies indicate that personal expo-
sures to dust are substantially lower when on-tool sys-
tems for sanding dust collection were used. On the con-
trary, Douwes et al. [6] reported that the application of
integral dust extraction unit to orbital sander was useless
in decreasing exposure to wood dust. The objective of this
pilot study was to assess the performance of commer-
cially available dust collection box at decreasing exposure
to wood aerosol during sanding spruce wood with hand-
held power belt sander.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experimental design
Assessment of the performance of the dust collection box
at decreasing wood dust concentration was evaluated by
sampling photometric data in the operator breathing
zone. The laboratory pilot study employed a paired sam-
ples design. Sanding dust exposure levels were deter-
mined when belt sander was equipped with dust box in
comparison with same sander without a dust box. The lay-
out of the instruments in the experiment is presented in
Fig. 1.
Fig. 1 Layout of experiment: 1 – aerosol monitor, 2 – IOM sam-
pler, 3 – belt sander, 4 – spruce plank, 5 – pressure force sensor,
6 – pressure force monitoring system
Test specimens
The input material for the production of the test speci-
mens were planks of spruce (Picea abies). Test specimens
were cut to the required dimension of 500 mm × 250 mm
× 50 mm (length × width × thickness) by the longitudinal
cutting using band saw (Mebor, HZT 1000) and following
by the cross cutting using cross cut saw (TOS Svitavy,
KRU). Moisture content of the planks was 12%. The mo-
bile workbench (Bosch Power Tools, PWB 600) was used
for clamping the test specimens.
Sanding procedure
Sanding was performed in longitudinal direction using a
commercially available hand-held belt sander (Bosch, PBS
75 A). No-load belt speed was 350 m.min
-1
. Sanding belt
with grain size P120 (Klingspor Inc., model LS309XH) was
replaced after each measurement. To ensure consistent
sanding operation, monitoring the pressure force was
performed by the load cell capacity sensor (Hoggan Scien-
tific, ErgoPAK FSR). The pressure force 50 N ± 5 N was ap-
plied on the sanding surface.
Wood removal measurement
The total quantity of aerosol produced when sanding
wood with hand-held power belt sander depends on the
total mass of wood removed. Remaining dust was elimi-
nated from each plank manually with the brush before
weighting procedure. The weighting procedure was per-
formed using an analytical balance (Sartorius AG, BP 3100
P). Wood removal ratios were determined by multiplying
mass of material extracted from the boards and the sand-
ing time.
Photometric sampling
Photometric data were collected utilizing laser photome-
ter (TSI Inc., DustTrak DRX 8533). Before each measure-
ment, zero calibration of the instrument was performed.
Sampling period (3 minutes) was estimated from the time
required to sand the test specimen. In order to obtain rep-
resentative data, sampling location within operator's
breathing zone was chosen. According to [8], the breath-
ing zone corresponds to a hemisphere (generally accepted
to be 30 cm in radius) extending in front of the human
face, centred on the midpoint of a line joining the ears.
The base of the hemisphere is a plane through this line,
the top of the head and the larynx. Ten repetitions were
performed in each trial. The average speed of air flow rate
at sampling point was measured using anemometer
(Testo, model Testo 480) and ranged from 1.6 m.s
-1
to 3.3
m.s
-1
.
Statistical analysis
Measured data were approximately log normally distrib-
uted and the geometric mean (GM) and geometric stand-
ard deviation (GSD) were determined. Using the log trans-
formed photometric data, a Student's t-test was per-
formed to examine if there was a statistically significant
difference in mass concentrations when belt sander was
used with dust box and without dust box. All statistical
186 Management Systems in Production Engineering 2020, Volume 28, Issue 3
analyses were carried out using the software Statistica
v.10 (StatSoft Inc.).
RESULTS
Removal ratios for the spruce wood ranged from 7.78
g.min
–1
to 11.25 g.min
–1
using dust collection box and
from 8.11 g.min
–1
to 10.88 g.min
–1
for the sanding without
sand box. Fig. 2 shows an example of the temporal varia-
tions in aerosol monitor response with time for generated
spruce dust during sanding with dust box.
Two-sample t-test on the logarithms of the collected pho-
tometric data indicated a statistically significant differ-
ence in geometric mean concentrations for both particle
size fractions. All sample t-test P-values were < 0.0001
(Table 1). Use of belt sander equipped with dust box re-
duced exposure by about 70% compared to exposure
without using dust box.
Table 1
Geometric mean (GM) and geometric standard deviation
(GSD) of photometric dust concentrations (mg.m
-3
) measured
when sanding with and without dust box
Particle
size fraction n Dust box
GM (GSD)
No dust
box
GM (GSD)
t-Test
P-value
inhalable 10 3.20
(1.22)
10.60
(1.20) P < 0.0001
respirable 10 0.58
(1.26)
1.98
(1.14) P < 0.0001
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
For sanding wood with hand-belt sander the traditional
engineering control measures include integral dust ex-
traction unit, mobile local exhaust ventilation, and
downdraft Table [4]. As observed in this pilot study, it is
clear that use of hand-held belt sander without appropri-
ate engineering control enhances risks related to spruce
wood dust inhalation exposure. There are several ap-
proaches to verify the effectiveness of on-tool extraction
system. Real-time inhalable and respirable dust measure-
ments in breathing zone of sander's operator were used
to assess the efficiency of examined integral dust extrac-
tion unit. The results of this pilot study have demon-
strated that airborne wood dust concentration can be
considerably decreased by utilizing market accessible dust
collection box while sanding spruce wood with hand-held
belt sander. Our results are consistent with results re-
ported by Thorpe and Brown [24]. In their study, electric
belt sander with cotton cloth filter bag was used to sand
beech wood and they reported reduction in airborne dust
concentrations ranging from 66 to 72%. On the contrary,
Douwes et al. [6] showed that the use of integral dust ex-
traction unit caused increase of airborne aerosols. How-
ever, their laboratory experiment involved sanding me-
dium density fibreboard using the different type of sander
with finer grain size of abrasive.
Two limitations of our study need to be mentioned. First,
the aerosol monitor was not adjusted for the measure-
ment of spruce wood dust. Dust Trak DRX has two calibra-
tion regimes. We performed only zero calibration proce-
dure for compensation of zero drift. In case that sampled
aerosol has different properties from reference aerosol, a
user calibration regime serves for determination of pho-
tometric and size correction calibration factors [25]. How-
ever, the intention of this pilot study was to examine if
there is any difference between two conditions related to
dust box using rather than to determine real occupational
exposure to wood dust. For this reason, it was sufficient
to know the relative mass concentration values. Second,
reported values of inhalable wood dust are underesti-
mated due to limitation in the size range (0.1 μm-15 μm)
of DustTrak DRX.
Fig. 2 Temporal variations in aerosol monitor response with time for generated spruce dust during sanding with dust box
M. DADO et al. – An Evaluation of On-Tool System for Sanding Dust Collection…
187
In conclusion, this pilot study proved that dust collection
box is efficient engineering control for decreasing inhala-
ble and respirable fractions of dust during sanding spruce
wood with hand-held belt sander. Nevertheless, we
would emphasize that even with considerable reductions;
on-tool system for sanding dust collection never com-
pletely eliminated exposure and the use of supplementary
respiratory protective equipment is required. Our further
research efforts will be focused on investigation of effects
of the sandpaper grade and wood species on effective-
ness of integral dust extraction system.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The paper is based on work performed under research con-
tract VEGA 1/0019/19 “Predictive models of workplace at-
mosphere contamination by solid aerosol during mechan-
ical wood processing” of the Science Grant Agency of the
Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the
Slovak Republic whose support is a gratefully acknowl-
edged.
REFERENCES
[1] F. Akbar-Khanzadeh, S. A. Milz, C. D. Wagner, M. S. Bisesi,
A. L. Ames, S. Khuder, P. Susi and M. Akbar-Khanzadeh.
“Effectiveness of Dust Control Methods for Crystalline Sil-
ica and Respirable Suspended Particulate Matter Exposure
During Manual Concrete Surface Grinding”. Journal of Oc-
cupational and Environmental Hygiene, vol. 7, no. 12, pp.
700-711, 2010.
[2] G. N. Carlton, K. B. Patel, D. L. Johnson and T. A. Hall. “The
Effectiveness of Handheld Ventilated Sanders in Reducing
Inhalable Dust Concentrations”. Applied Occupational and
Environmental Hygiene, vol. 18, no.1, pp. 51-56, 2003.
[3] M. R. Cooper, G. H. West, L. G. Burrelli, D. Dresser, K. N.
Griffin, A. M. Segrave, J. Perrenoud and B. E. Lippy. “Inha-
lation exposure during spray application and subsequent
sanding of a wood sealant containing zinc oxide nanopar-
ticles”. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hy-
giene, vol.14, no.7, pp. 510-522, 2017.
[4] M. Dado, L. Mikušová and R. Hnilica. “Laboratory investi-
gations applied to wood dust emitted by electrical hand-
held belt sander”. Management Systems in Production En-
gineering, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 133-136, 2018.
[5] M. Dado, M. Schwarz, A. Očkajová, R. Hnilica and D.
Borošová. “Efficiency of Local Exhaust Ventilation System
during Stainless Steel Grinding”. Manufacturing Technol-
ogy, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 49-53, 2016.
[6] J. Douwe, K. Cheung, B. Prezant, M. Sharp, M. Corbin, D.
McLean, A. Mannetje, V. Schlunssen, T. Sigsgaard, H. Kro-
mhout, A. LaMontagne, N. Pearce and J. McGlothlin.
“Wood Dust in Joineries and Furniture Manufacturing: An
Exposure Determinant and Intervention Study”. Annals of
Works Exposures and Health, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 416-428,
2017.
[7] EN 481:1993. Workplace atmospheres. Size fraction defi-
nitions for measurement of airborne particles.
[8] EN 1540:2011. Workplace atmospheres. Terminology.
[9] W. Fransman, C. Bekker, P. Tromp and W. B. Duis. “Poten-
tial Release of Manufactured Nano Objects during Sanding
of Nano-Coated Wood Surfaces”. The Annals of Occupa-
tional Hygiene, vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 875-884, 2016.
[10] C. B. Healy, M. A. Coggins, M. Van Tongeren, L. MacCalman
and P. McGowan. “An Evaluation of On-Tool Shrouds for
Controlling Respirable Crystalline Silica in Restoration
Stone Work”. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol. 58,
no. 9, pp. 1155-1167, 2014.
[11] ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety manage-
ment systems. Requirements with guidance for use.
[12] ISO 7708:1995. Air quality. Particle size fraction definitions
for health-related sampling.
[13] T. Jankowski. “Impact of Air Distribution on Efficiency of
Dust Capture from Metal Grinding – Bench Test Method”.
Industrial Hygiene, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 735-745, 2011.
[14] D. L. Johnson, M. L. Phillips, Ch. Qi, A. T. Van and D. A. Haw-
ley. “Experimental Evaluation of Respirable Dust and Crys-
talline Silica Controls During Simulated Performance of
Stone Countertop Fabrication Tasks with Powered Hand
Tools”. Annals of Work Exposures and Health, vol. 61, no.
6, pp. 711-723, 2017.
[15] P. Koleda and P. Koleda. „Optical measurements of saw-
dust dimensions”. Wood Research, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 505-
512, 2016.
[16] M. Kotus, R. Drlička, R. Mikuš and J. Žarnovský. “Hazard
analysis and risk assessment in metal cutting process,” in
Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering, vol. 2,
no. 1. W. Biały, Ed. Warsaw: De Gruyter Poland, 2019, pp.
382-391.
[17] M. Kotus, K. Koloman and M. Hudec. “Assessment of wood
processing safety in the production organization,” in Mul-
tidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering, vol. 1, no.
1. W. Biały, Ed. Warsaw: De Gruyter Poland, 2018, pp. 727-
737.
[18] D. R. Liverseed, P. W. Logan, C. E. Johnson, S. Z. Morey and
P. C. Raynor. “Comparative Emissions of Random Orbital
Sanding between Conventional and Self-Generated Vac-
uum Systems”. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol.
57, no. 2, pp. 221-229, 2013.
[19] Marková, E. Mračková, A. Očkajová and J. Ladomerský.
“Granulometry of selected wood dust species of dust from
orbital sanders”. Wood Research, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 983-
992, 2016.
[20] Očkajová, A. Beljaková and J. Ľuptáková. “Selected proper-
ties of spruce dust generated from sanding operations”.
Drvna Industrija, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 3-10, 2008.
[21] J. Ojima. “Efficiency of a Tool-Mounted Local Exhaust Ven-
tilation System for Controlling Dust Exposure during Metal
Grinding Operations”. Industrial Hygiene, vol. 46, no. 6, pp.
817-819, 2007.
[22] E. Sujová and H. Čierna. “Complex evaluation of safety cul-
ture determinants in manufacturing companies in Slo-
vakia”. Management Systems in Production Engineering,
vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 184-188, 2018.
[23] Thorpe and R. C. Brown. „Factors influencing the produc-
tion of dust during the sanding of wood”. American Indus-
trial Hygiene Association Journal, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 236-
242, 1995.
[24] Thorpe and R. C. Brown. “Measurements of the effective-
ness of dust extraction systems of hand sanders used on
wood”. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol. 38, no. 3,
pp. 279-302, 1994.
[25] X. Wang, G. Chancellor, J. Evenstad, J. E. Farnsworth, A.
Hase, G. M. Olson, A. Sreenath and J. K. Agarwal. “A Novel
Optical Instrument for Estimating Size Segragated Aerosol
Mass Concentration in Real Time”. Aerosol Science and
Technology, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 939-950, 2009.
188 Management Systems in Production Engineering 2020, Volume 28, Issue 3
[26] Welling, M. Lehtimäki, S. Rautio, T. Lähde, S. Enbom, P.
Hynynen and K. Hämeri. “Wood Dust Particle and Mass
Concentrations and Filtration Efficiency in Sanding of
Wood Materials”. Journal of Occupational and Environ-
mental Hygiene, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 90-98, 2009.
[27] G. H. West, M. R. Cooper, L. G. Burrelli, D. Dresser and B.
E. Lippy. “Exposure to airborne nano-titanium dioxide dur-
ing airless spray painting and sanding”. Journal of Occupa-
tional and Environmental Hygiene, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 218-
228, 2019.
[28] D. E. Young-Corbett and M. A. Nussbaum. “Dust Control
Effectiveness of Drywall Sanding Tools”. Journal of Occu-
pational and Environmental Hygiene, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 385-
389, 2009.
[29] T. Zimmer and A. D. Maynard. “Investigation of the aero-
sols produced by a high-speed, hand-held grinder using
various substrates”. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene,
vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 663-672, 2002.
Miroslav Dado
ORCID ID: 0000-0003-3161-4008
Technical University in Zvolen
Faculty of Technology
Department of Manufacturing Technology
and Quality Management
Studentska 26, 960 01 Zvolen, Slovak Republic
e-mail: dado@tuzvo.sk
Anna Lamperová
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-3407-2753
Technical University in Zvolen
Faculty of Technology
Department of Manufacturing Technology
and Quality Management
Studentska 26, 960 01 Zvolen, Slovak Republic
e-mail: analamperova@gmail.com
Luboš Kotek
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2899-4532
University of Technology Brno,
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
Department of Production Systems and Virtual Reality
Technicka 2896/2, 616 69 Brno, Czech Republic,
e-mail: kotek.l@fme.vutbr.cz
Richard Hnilica
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2333-4367
Technical University in Zvolen
Faculty of Technology
Department of Manufacturing Technology
and Quality Management
Studentska 26, 960 01 Zvolen, Slovak Republic
e-mail: hnilica@tuzvo.sk
