|
|
|
| Occupational hazards in sand casting enterprises in Wenling City |
| CHEN Feirong, MO Xiaoyan
|
| Department of Health Monitoring, Wenling Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Wenling, Zhejiang 317500, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective To investigate the main occupational hazards of sand casting process enterprises, so as to provide insights into occupational disease prevention and control. Methods In 2021 and 2022, six typical ferrous metal casting enterprises using sand casting technology in Wenling City, Zhejiang Province were selected to investigate the production processes and equipment, the operation of occupational disease prevention facilities and personal protective equipment. Occupational hazards including silica dust, noise, high temperature and ultraviolet radiation were detected and analyzed. Results Six sand casting enterprises had not effectively set up and use occupational disease prevention equipment, and some employees had not worn personal protective equipment as required. The participation rate of occupational health examination was 100.00%. Among the 54 silica dust sampling points at the sand mixing, molding, sand falling, shot blasting and mud core drilling positions, the overall dust concentration exceeding the standard rate was 100.00%, and the respiratory dust exceeding the standard rate was 44.44%. Among the 55 noise measurement points at the sand mixing, sand falling, shot blasting, mud core drilling, polishing and blowing positions, 51 exceeded the standard, with a rate of 92.73%. Among the 90 sampling points for melting, painting, polishing, blowing and welding positions, the concentrations of welding fumes, manganese and its compounds, ethyl acetate and other cahmical factors did not exceed the standard. Six ultraviolet radiation measurement points in the welding position and six heat stress measurement points in the melting position did not exceed the standard. Conclusion The main occupational hazards of sand casting process enterprises in Wenling City are silica dust and noise, and occupational disease prevention and control should be further strengthened.
|
|
Received: 02 January 2024
Revised: 14 March 2024
Published: 15 April 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 周天文. 兴化市58家乡镇精密铸造企业职业病危害现状评价[J]. 江苏预防医学,2015,26(4):95-98.
[2] 高永红,许新春,胡娥,等. 某大型铸造企业30年尘肺发病情况调查分析[J]. 中国医药指南,2013,11(8):393-394.
[3] 顾永权,王爱红,毛荷明,等. 两家黑色金属铸造企业职业健康风险评估结果分析[J]. 预防医学,2021,33(9):924-927,931.
[4] 郭孔荣,戎艳,吴越芾,等. 上海市松江区某黑色金属铸造公司职业病危害现状和风险水平[J]. 职业与健康,2017,33(10):1297-1299,1302.
[5] 邹华,方兴林,周莉芳,等. 2006—2020年浙江省职业性噪声聋报告病例特征分析[J]. 环境与职业医学,2022,39(4):357-361.
[6] 国家安全生产监督管理总局.职业卫生技术服务机构检测工作规范[S/OL].[2024-03-14]. http://yjglt.gxzf.gov.cn/aqsc/zyjk/t2999682.shtml.
[7] 中华人民共和国卫生部.工作场所空气中有害物质监测的采样规范:GBZ 159—2004 [S]. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2006.
[8] 中华人民共和国国家卫生和计划生育委员会.工作场所空气有毒物质测定:GBZ/T 300.24—2017 [S/OL]. [2024-03-14]. http://www.bzfxw.com/soft/sort019/sort094/335990.html?tdsourcetag=s_pcqq_aiomsg.
[9] 中华人民共和国卫生部. 工作场所空气有毒物质测定:GBZ/T 160—2004 [S]. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2018.
[10] 中华人民共和国卫生部.工作场所空气中粉尘的测定:GBZ/T 192—2007[S/OL].[2024-03-14]. https://www.doc88.com/p-342625285850.html.
[11] 中华人民共和国卫生部.工作场所物理因素测量:GBZ/T 189—2007[S].北京:人民卫生出版社,2007.
[12] 国家卫生健康委员会. 工作场所有害因素职业接触限值第1部分:化学有害因素:GBZ 2.1—2019 [S]. 北京:中国标准出版社,2019.
[13] 中华人民共和国卫生部. 工作场所有害因素职业接触限值第2部分:物理因素:GBZ 2.2—2007 [S]. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2007.
[14] 柏品清,杨敏娟,沈惠平,等.上海市郊区铸造行业粉尘职业病危害现状调查[J]. 中国职业医学,2010,37(6):518-519.
[15] 冷朋波,段东辉,李晓海,等.宁波市59家黑色金属铸造企业粉尘危害特征分析[J].中华劳动卫生职业病杂志,2022,40(8):591-596.
[16] 孙振国,朱劲,陈俊,等.靖江市新桥镇铸造行业职业病危害现状及防治对策[J]. 中国职业医学,2016,43(6):755-757,761.
[17] 刘宏凯,朱美芬,樊海军,等. 上海市某郊区铸造行业职业病危害现状调查[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援,2007,25(2):72-74.
[18] 余向东. 2018年马鞍山市某铸造企业粉尘职业病危害现状[J].职业与健康,2019,35(20):2740-2743.
[19] 谢贝贝,常薇,吴琨,等.三种风险评估方法在某汽车铸造企业噪声风险评估中的应用[J/OL].中华劳动卫生职业病杂志,2022,40(4)[2024-03-14]. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn121094-20210109-00036.
[20] 林芳,孙晓伟,江荧荧.福建省2021年96家铸造企业重点岗位职业病危害因素调查[J].海峡预防医学杂志,2022,28(6):67-69.
[21] 彭娟娟,毛翎,孙文灏,等. 上海某铸钢厂用石灰石砂代替石英砂消除清砂工矽肺效果研究[J]. 劳动医学,2000,17(2):84-86.
[22] 李转宁,李梦兰,曾静,等. 某机械制造厂铸造车间通风除尘技术研究[J]. 企业技术开发,2017,36(12):48-50. |
|
|
|
