English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Recent regulations are encouraging the replacement of older types of man-made mineral fibre by more soluble and, thus, less biopersistent compositions. In order for there to be any health benefits from this policy and to gain maximum benefit from such substitutions, the use of the new materials should not increase exposure. The work reported here was undertaken to investigate the use of new high-temperature glass insulation wools in place of refractory ceramic fibres (RCF). Airborne fibre levels occurring during the manufacture of both RCF and calcium magnesium silicate wools (CMS) were compared using measurements of genuine workplace exposure from a routine monitoring operation on the same plant. Exposures during use were compared in one customer facility where RCF and CMS blankets were used for the same task. Further comparisons were made in a laboratory test of dustiness using a "shaking box test". For some manufacturing tasks there are only a few workplace samples and there are few opportunities for genuine comparisons with both RCF and CMS in identical uses. However, both materials produced very similar exposure levels during manufacture, use and in the laboratory test. The novel magnesium silicate fibre was significantly dustier in the laboratory test.

Dustiness of Different High-Temperature Insulation Wools and Refractory Ceramic Fibres