reducing risk with exposure monitoring equipment

14

Upload: primrose-oconnor

Post on 27-Dec-2015

224 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment
Page 2: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

Page 3: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

What we know

What we don’t know

What we must assume

What we must never assume

Components of risk assessment

What is the conclusion of risk assessment?The definition of acceptable risk

Page 4: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

PID and LEL monitors

Do they keep you safe?

Page 5: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

These machines are DUMB!

The value displayed is a TOTAL concentration of all DETECTED compounds AS IF (selected compound)

Indicative at best

Page 6: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

Calibrate to Chocolate: Display 500 Chocolate

Display Vanilla (response factor 8): 4000 Vanilla

Display Cake (response factor 0.002): 1 Cake

300 Chocolate (RF 1)

200 Flour (RF 0.25)

200 Sugar (RF 0.47)

6 Cocoa (RF 1.16)

150 Sunflower oil (RF 0.1)

300 Soured cream (RF 0.08)

2 Egg (RF N/A)

1 Vanilla Extract (RF 8)

Page 7: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

PID : Photo Ionisation Detector

Broad spectrumSensitiveNon destructiveLow cost

Cannot see smaller/lighter compounds e.g. methane

UV Lamp ionises the gas sample. The free electrons are then counted and this value is converted and displayed as gas concentration (typically in ppm).

Page 8: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

LEL and close space monitors

Lower Explosive Limit

Catalytic diffusion sensor burns available volatiles and converts the energy value to display %LEL

Broad spectrum

Low cost

Can detect smaller/lighter compounds (methane)

O2

H2S

CO

LEL

Page 9: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

%VOL - %LEL - PPMEXAMPLE: Pentane

1%VOL―75%LEL―10,000ppm

1%LEL―0.13%VOL―133ppm

1ppm―0.0075%LEL―0.0001%VOL

Typical resolution for LEL monitors 1.0%LEL

Typical resolution for PID 1ppm

Best resolution for PID 1PPB!

Page 10: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

Correction factors: Calibration gas and Action alarms

Correction factors are not absolute Sensor type/manufacturer

Calibration gas: Pentane/Methane? Isobutylene?

Are alarms preset?

Is this arbitrary?

Page 11: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

Other factors

Weather conditions

Sensor inhibitors: Methane, Nitrogen, Carbon monoxide

Sensor poisoning: Silicones

Sensor reaction time: Pentane/methane

Personal proximity

Page 12: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

ZERO

Nominal drift

Who do you trust?

Warm up period

Ambient or absolute?

Carbon filter

Page 13: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

Bump testing and CalibrationEnsure adequate warm up period

Pump stall test

Bump test first

Potential issues: No gas, blocked regulator, cold machine, contaminated filters, incorrect gas selection

When to calibrate?

Potential issues: as above

Gain?

Page 14: Reducing risk with Exposure Monitoring Equipment

Are these machines DUMB?It is not the tools we use which make us good, but rather how we employ them.

These tools help you to redefine the risk and revaluate your own acceptable risk