p. 1



# OAR Box 1413 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 19)11-1-1 9 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/9/2008 3:11:21 PM

Sheet 19 of 114P. 2


### TECHNICA L INFORMATIO N ^.ft^Htf^iooW ^ Jt-94-5 2 OowPtastfcs 

### THERMOSET POLYMER

S Polyurethanes , Epoxies , VinjiEste r an d Hig h Reductio n of

Styren e Emission s fo r

Filamen t Windin g Operation s Ferfa feI E

I ! • Do n H
. Kelle y LJ
. Craigi e G.L
. Webste

r RL
. Wykowsk

i
Th e Do w Chemica

l Compan y 230 1 N
. Brazospor

t Blvd
. Freeport , TX 7754 1

Abstrac t Tw o o f the hottes t topic s i n the Fiberglass-Reinforced Plasti c (FRP) industr y toda y are styren e emissio

n an d personnel exposur

e reduction. Thes e are th e result o f clea n ai r regulations an

d changing guideline s concerning saf e exposur e levels
. Within afiberglass shop , ope n moldin g operation s suc

h a s han d lay-up , spray-up an

d filament windin g ar e considere d majo

r contributor s t

o styrene emissions
. Thi s paper reviews astud

y conducte d to determine the effec

t o f selecte d resin propertie s and operatin g condition s o n emission s fro mfilamen t windin g operations
. Introductio n B y 1997 , th

e Clea n Ai r Ac t Amendment

s wil l require th e Environmenta

l Protection Agency (EPA

) t o develo p maximu machievabl e contro l technolog y (MACT ) standard s fo

r styren e emission s generate d by th e composit e plastic s industr

y 1
. Thes e standard s would b e use d a s minimu

mguideline s fo

r stat e enforcemen

t Styren e emission s to the ai r ca n b e reduced b y sourc e reduction or

abatement

Sourc e reductio n ha s th e advantag e o f als o reducing personne

l exposur e and , i f achievabl e throug

h operatio n procedur

e change s o r resin chemistry , woul

d b e th e preferre

d metho d o f reducing emissions
. Th e presen

t studie s wer

e designe d t o measur e the effect o f selecte d variable s o

n poin t sourc e reduction a s oppose d to emission captur e and treatmen t

Th e purpos e o

f thi s paper i s to discus s tw o experimenta l desig n studie s tha

t identifie d ai r

flow , styrene conten t an d suppressan

t leve l a s significan

t effect s fo r styren e emission s fro

malaborator

y filamen t windin g process .

NOTICE : Thi s infortnatio o i s presente d i n goo d faith . N o warrant y expresse d o r implied , i s give n no r i s freedom from an y paten towne d b y Th e Do w Chemical Company o r b y other s t o b e inferred . Inasmuc h a s an y assistanc e furnishe d b y Do w wit h referenc e t o th e prope r us e an d disposa l b provide d withou tcharge , Do w assume s n o obligatio n o r Gabilit y therefore . Read , understand , and/o r practic e th e informatio n printe d o n produc tMateria l Safet y Dat a sheet s prio r t o us e o f

an y Do w produc t'I f

product s ar e discribe d a s 'experimental" : qualit y spec s ma y no t

b< * full y determined ; analysi s o f hazard s an d cautio n i n handlin g an d us e ar e required : Do w reserve s th e right t o chang e s^cificatio n a H 'o r discontinu e productio n IP. 3

Experimenta l Procedur e Th e experimenta

l approac h wa s t o choos e five resin an d operationa

l variable s tha

tcoul d potentiall y effec tstyrene emission s fiom a filamentwindin g proces s usin g styrene dilute d unsaturate

d thermosetting resin. Screenin g experiments wer e the n conducte d t o detennin e i f thes e variables wer

e significan teffects . Tabl e 1 show s th e five variable s tha twer e chose n fo r the firs texperimentan d th e level s tha twer e studied . Th e variable s wer e temperature , air flow , styren e conten to f th e resin, styren e suppressant

, an d ge l time. Fbr screenin g purposes , a tw o leve l fractional factoria l experimenta

l design wa s chose n a s show n i n Tabl e 2* . Th e experimenta

l se tup i s show n i n Figur e 1 . Th e equipmentconsiste d o f a filament windin g machine , wit

h a 3 f tdiamete r b y 6 f tlon g mandrel , which wa s locate d unde r a 1 2 b y 1 2 f tpyramida

l hoo d wit h a on e f tdiamete r ventstac k o n top . A^lQor*_to_ceilin g plasti c curtain wa s place d aroun d th e outsid e edg e o f

th e hoo d fo r th e firs texperimen t Passiv e dosimeters * wer

e placed i n specifie d area s t o measur

e styren e levels . The y wer e place d ove r the resin bath(expecte d t o b e th e highes tstyrene levels), nea r th e mandre

l o n th e sid e opposit

e th e resin bat

h (representin g operation personnel) , immediatel y outsid e th e curtain(t

o measur e backgroun

d styren e levels) , an

d i n th e ven tstack fou r diameter s fro m the intake openin g t o measur e emissions . Also , a charcoa l tub e dosimete r wa s place d i n th e sam e region a s the passiv e dosimete r i n the stack . Th e ventstack wa s equippe d wit h a dampe r t o contro l th e air flow . Ih e ai r flo w wa s measured atthre

e dampe r setting s accordin g t o EP A 4 0 CFRCh.l , P t60 , App . A , Metho d 1 . Th e temperatur e an d ai r flo w wer e se tprio r t o winding . Cobal tnaphthenat e (CoNap) , dimethy

l analine (DMA ) an

d suppressant(Experimenta l Epoxy Viny l Ester Resi n Additiv e XUS-71998.00 ) wer e premixe d int o 2 2 pound s o f resin. fi£teea>pounds o f resin were catalyze d an

d 5 pound s o f

di e catalyze d resin„were place d intiirs*esi n bath.- . Th e mandre

l was rotate

d at2 0 revolutions pe r minute . Catalyze d resin wa s adde d t o th e bat h a s needed . Th

e remaining ?,pound s o f

resin wa s later catalyze d an d added t o tiie bat h a s needed . Afte r th e resulting cylinde r reached a specifie d thickness , the windin g wa s stopped an d the dosimete r ove r th

e bat h wa s removed. Onc e th e resin gelle d an d reache d pea k exotherm , th e othe r dosimeters were removed , an d al l wer e sen tt

o analytica

l service s fo r styren e conten tdetermination . Once th e laminate ha

d cured , th

e cylinde r wa s removed, weighed , an d sample s wer

e cu tou tfo r glas s conten tdeterminations . Th e amoun

to f styrene adsorbe

d b y th e dosimeter s wa s determine d b y addin g 1.5 milliliter s o f

carbo n disulfid e t

o th e dosimete r an

d lettin g i tstan

d fo r 1/ 2 hour wit

h occasiona l gentl e agitation . Th e carbo n disulfid e wa s the n transferre

d t o a ga s chromatograph (GC ) t

o determine th e amounto f styrene desorbed b y the extraction . Th e micrograms o f

styrene determined b y th e G C were use d t o calculat e tiie tim e weighte d averag e (TWA ) o f

styrene detecte d b y th e dosimete r i n par tpe r millio n (ppm) .


# zP. 4

A 4-factor , tw o leve l half-fractiona l factoria l screenin g experiment , a s show n i n Tabl e 3 , wa s chose n fo r th e secon d experiment^ . Th e factor s an d tiieir level s ar

e show n i n Tabl e 4 . Th e experimental procedur e wa s sjrailarj o exMrimentl , ex^t|^|(5otal«hclestii e (TE^wa s buil taroun

d th e filamentwinde r an

d aJOGf e ' emission s i n th e stac k i n additio n t o a passiv e dwlmeter^and.charwwl-tube . Th e TB , show n i n Figure 2. , wa s based o n aii EP A desig n describe d i n EP A 450/4-91-020 . Th e T E wa s equippe d wit

h 3 natura

l draf topening s (NDO ) a tth e bottom o f thre e sides . Th e hoo d an d ven tstac k from experiment1 were utilized . However , passiv e dosimeter s wer e no tuse d t o monito r th e bat h o r t o simulate worke r exposure . Also , a manomete r wa s use d t o monito r th e ai r flo w i n th e stack . Th e G C wa s calibrated wit h a standar

d ga s compose d o f

5 0 ppm styren e an

d 5 0 pp m ethy l benzene . Th e standar

d wa s ru n throug h th e sampl e valv e a t3 minut e interval s until th e are a responses wer e stable . Th e integrato r wa s tiien calibrate d t o th e response factor s base d o n th e standai d gas . Durin g winding , a n ai r sampl e wa s draw

n from th e stac k an d throug h th e G C sampl e valv e ever y three minutes . Th e styren e concentration i n pp m wa s . , ; . obtaine d from a prin

tou tprovided b y th e integrator . -j- y R r X 33%S7 Y =- * " ° . . " I n experimen t2 , windin g wa s continue d unti l the layer s wer e approximatel y on e fourth<of a n inc h thick . A total o f

2 2 pound s resin wa s formulate d andx»t*flyzed fo r th e 4 0 minut e geltime . Fbrthe S minute ge l time , a fas tgellin g formulatio n wasadde d t o the resin bat h 5 minute s befor e windin g wa s stopped . Th e passiv e dosimete r an d th e charcoa

l tub e wer e no tremoved from th e stack until di e ga s chromatograph indicate d th e styrene leve l ha d reached zero . Th e styren e concentratio n in the stack wa s determine d ever y 3 minute s wit

h th e ga s chromatograph . Th e passiv e dosimeter s wer e sen tt o a n analytical laborator

y fo r styren e conten tdeterminations . Th e followin g formula s were use d t

o calculat e th e time weighte d averag e (TWA ) o f

the styren e concentration fo r th e respective measurin g device : Ga s Chromatograph

y TW A emissions , pp

m = tota l styrene in ppm

/ tota l numbe r o f sample s
Passiv e Dosimeter s TW A emissions , pp

m = (styrene i n u g x 8.7 7 min/g) /

(0.9 2 x tim e i n minutes)* *
Charcoa l Tub e


# 3P. 5

TW A emissions , pp

m= (styren e in u g x 23 5 cc/g) /

(0.7 6 x tim e i n rain x 20 0 cc/min ) Th e TW A of the styren e concentratio n wa s used t o estimate th e tota l styren e emissions
. T o conver t th e styren e concentratio n t o total pounds , th e following formul awa s used :
Tota l styrene emissions , lb s = (TW A styren e emission s i n cc/ra* * x ai r flow in m^/mi

n x tim e in min
. x 10 4 g/raole) / (24.451/raol e x 100

0 cc/ 1 x 45 4 g/lb) 4 A statistica

l softwar e program , JM P 2.0. 5 fromth e SA S Institut e i n Cary , Nort

h Carolina , wa s use d t o analyz e th e datafo

r effects an d significance
. Result s Th e result s of

the firs t experimen

t ar e show n i n Table s 5,6, 7 an d 8
. Fo r th e analysis , ru n numbe r one wa s no t used , becaus e th e resin bat

h gelle d befor

e th e specified thicknes s wa s reached causing th e emissio n level s t o b e lowe r tha n expected
. Tabl e 5 show s th

e time weighted averag e (TWA ) emission s i

n pp mfo r the badge s ove

r th e bat h an d i n front o f th e winde r for eac h run . Th e pound s o

f emission s measure

d i n th e stac k wit h bot h th e badg e an

d charcoa l tub e are als o i n Tabl e 5
. Th e dat ashow s tha

t ther e wa s difficult

y wit h th e charcoa

l tub e apparatus . Thi s ma

y hav e bee n due t o th e vibration s i n th

e stac k breaking th e seal betwee

n th e charcoa

l tube an d di e pump . Thi s would prohibit

th e stac k ga s fro mbein g drawn throug

h th e filter
. Tabl e 6 show s th

e statistica l significanc e o

f eac h variabl e o n th

e emission s ove

r th e bath
. The F rati o i s th

e model mea

n squar e divide d b

y th e error mea n square . I

f aparamete

r i s a significan t effec t i n th e model , the F Rati o i s highe r tha n expected b y chanc e alone
. Having ahig

h F ratio , th e temperatur

e an d th e airflo w wer e significan

t effect s fo r th e styren e concentratio n ove

r th e bath
. Prob> F i s the observed significanc e probabilit y o f obtaining agreate

r F valu e by chanc e alon e i f the specified mode

l fit s n o bette

r tha n th e overall response mean . Fo r di e purpose s o f thi s study , observe

d significanc e probabilitie s of 0.1 5 or les s wer e considered significant Wit h Prob> F o

f 0.856 6 and 0.411 2 respectively, th e styrene concentratio

n i n th e resin an

d th e us e o f suppressan

t wer e no t statistically significan

t effects
. Figure s 3 an

d 4 ar e leverag e plot s showin g th e effec t o f temperatur

e and ai r flow o n th e styren e emission s ove

r th e bath
. Th e line s represent the relative chang e i

n emission s ove

r the rang e o

f chang e o f the ai r flo w an d temperature . Th e dotted line s ar e confidence curve s fo r the model
. A

n effec t i s significan

t if th e confidenc e curv e crosse s the lin e whic h i s th e mea n value
. A s show

n i n Fig
. 3 , th e styren e concentratio n measure d ove r th e bat hP. 6

increase d a s th e temperatur e increased
. O n th e other

hand , th e styrene concentratio n decrease d a s th e ai r

flow increase d a s show n inHg
. 4
. .. . . . . .. . Simila r result s wer

e obtained wit

h th e dosimeter

tha t wa s use d t

o simulat e aworker s exposur e a s shown i n Tabl e 6
. Th e styren e concentratio n increased wit h temperatur

e and decrease d widi air

flow
. Agai

n th e styren e content

of th e resin an

d di e us e of

suppressan

t di d no t affect th e styren e concentratio n a s measure d b y th e dosimete r use d t o simulat

e a worice r standin g in fron

t o f di e mandrel
. Thi s wa s probably du e t o di e constan

t placemen t o f fres h resin o n th e mandre

l surfac e durin g filament

winding
. MI.SSIN/ 6 F_*>y£t > 5 AND&[ A s th e air flow increased , styrene ' emission s increased
. A s th e styrene conten t o f th e resin decreased , Hg
. 6 , di e styren e emission s decreased
. Tabl e 8 show s tha t styren e emissio n level s wer e responsive to th e styren e content

o f th e resin , di e suppressant

an d th e ai r flow , bu t di e temperatur

e an d di e ge l tim e ha d n o affec t on emissions
. A second experimen

t was conducted becaus e i t

wa s believe d tha

t mor e frequen t monitoring o

f emission s durin

g filament windin g would giv e mor

e insigh t int o ho w t o reduce emission s fro

mth e filament windin g process . Thi s wa s accomplishe d b y monitorin g th e stac k

ga s wid i aga s chromatograph which sample d ever y thre e minutes
. Th e results frommeasuring th e styrene concentratio n in di e stac k ga s versu s time i s show

n in Rgur e 7
. I t

show s th e styren

e concentratio n versu s tim

e for run s 7 an d 8
. Ru n 7 ha d a slo w ge l time an

d ru n 8 ha d afas t ge l time
. I n Figur

e 7 , note tha

t mos t o f th e styren e wa s emitte d durin g th e winding
. Onc e th e windin g wa s completed , die styrene concentratio n fell sharply an

d continued at

amuc h lower leve l becoming zero withi

n 6 0 minutes
. Th e knowledg e tha

t dier e wa s asudde

n chang e in styren e concentration , whe n the filamen t windin g stopped , becam

e usefu l fo r th e statistica

l analysis
. B y analyzin

g di e affec t o f the variable s durin

g an d afte r winding , di e significanc e o f eac h variable becam

e mor e obviou s tha

n measuring emission s ove r th e entire perio d o

f di e windin

g process . Tabl e 9 show s di e emission s befor e an d afte r windin g fo

r eac h run . For

most o f th e runs , ove r 80 % of di e emission s occurre

d durin g winding
. Ru

n 2 whic h ha d lo w ai r flow , lo w styrene , suppressan t

an d afast ge l tim e ha d th e lowes t

emission s bot

h durin g an d afte r winding
. Ru

n 7 whic h ha d hig h air flow , hig h styrene , no suppressan t an d alon g ge l tim

e ha d th e highes t

emission s boti

i durin g and afte r winding
. Table s 1 0 an

d 1 1 sho w di e statistica

l significanc e o f

di e experimenta

l variable s o n styren e emission s durin g an

d afte r winding
. Th e high F ratios fo r th e styren e conten t an d di e suppressan t indicat e tha t die y ha d the greates t

effect o n th e styren

e emission s during winding
. I n bod

i cases , the analysi s (Prob>F ) showe d dia t ther e wa s ove r a98 % chanc e tiiat thes e wer e real effects
. Wit

h aProb> F o

f 0.1135 , th e ai r

flo w ha d nearl y a n 88 % chanc e o f being asignifican

t effect



## 5P. 7

Afte r windin g was completed th e significan t emissio n effect s wer

e differen t as shown i n Tabl e 11
. Witi

i aprob>F o

f 0.0058 , di e ge l time ha

d ove r a99 % probabilit

y o f bein g a significan t effec t an d th e styren e conten

t (prob> F 0.0563 ) of

th e resin ha

d a94 % probabilit y o f being significan

t Th e air flo w an d suppressant

did no t significantl

y affec t emission s afte

r th e windin g stopped
. Durin g filament

windin g the styrene concentratio n i n th e ai r apparentl y reached astead

y stat e which i s controlle d b

y di e introductio n of

fres h resin o n th e surface
. Once th e windin g stopped , the styrene concentratio n droppe d t o th e equilibriu mtha t wa s establishe d b

y th e surface
. Conclusion s 1
. Of th e stac k emission s whic

h wer e measured , oyer80%OcCttre d durirtg-*thtf-Windin g .process . 2
. Stac k emission s afte

r winding accounted fo

r les s tha n 20 % o f the styren e emitted
. 3
. Continuou s monitorin

g o f stack emission s vi aga s chromatograph y greatl y aided i n understandin

g the proces s an

d analyzin g th e data
. 4
. Th e stack

emission s measure

d during winding wer

e significantl

y effecte d b y th e air flow , th e styrene conten

t o f th e resin, an d di e us e of

suppressant 5
. Stack emission s afte

r windin g wer e significantiy effected b

y the styrene conten

t o f the resin an d th e ge l time
. 6
. Styrene emission s measure d ove r th e bat h an d emission s simulating apersonne l exposur e wer e significantl

y effecte d b y th e temperatur

e an d ai r flow. Acknowledgment s Th e author s wis

h t o than k Dr
. Stanle y Deraing fo

r hi s usefu l an d enlightenin

g consultations
. Notic e Th e informatio

n i n thi s publication i s presented i n goo d faith , but n o warrant y i s given , expres s o r implied , no

r i s freedo mfro man y paten t t o b e inferred
.P. 8

Reference s 1 . Joh n Schweitzer , Th e Society o f th e Plastic s Industry , Inc. , privat e communicatio n 2 . U.S . Environmenta

l Protectio n Agency . Compilatio n o f Ai r Pollutan

tEmissio n Factors . AP-42 . U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Researc h Triangl e park

, Nort h Carolina , September , 1985 . 3 . Donal d J . Wheeler , Table s o f Screening Designs , Secon d Edition , (Knoxville , Tennessee : SP C Press , Inc. , 1989) , p . 19 . 4 . 3 M Organic Vapo r Monitors #3500/3510 : Instruction s fo r Use . Occupationa l Healt h & Safet y Product s Division/3M , Th e 3 M Company , S tPaul , Minnesota .
5 . Stephe n W . Edgerton e tal. , "Th e Measuremen

tSolution, " United State s Environmenta

l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA) , EPA-450/4-91-020 , Augus t1991 .



## 1P. 9

TABLE4.^EXPERIMEN T 1VARIABL

E AN D LEVEL

S NUMBE R 1 2 3 4 5 VARIABL E Temperatur

e Air Ho w Styren e Conten

t Suppressan

t Leve l Ge l Tim e UNIT S " o p CF M * % Minute s LO

W LEVEL (-1 ) 7 0 50 0 3 3 0 4 0 HIG

H LEVE L (+1 ) 8 8 3,00 0 5 0 1. 5 9 0
TABL E 2 . EXPERIMENT 1 DESIG N RU N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 12 STYREN

E
+ +

- +

- +

-

- + + + + TEMPERATUR E

- +

-

- + +

- +

-

-

- + AI R

FLO W +

-

-

- + + +

-

-

-

- + GE

L TIM E

-

-

- +

- + + +

-

- + + SUPPRESSANT

+

-

- + +

-

- +

-

- +

-
TABL E 3
. EXPERIMEN

T 2 DESIG

N RU N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 AIRFLO W

-

-

-

- + + +
+ • STYREN

E

-

- + +

-

- + + SUPPRESSANT

- +

- + +

-

- + GELTIM E

- + +

-

- +

- +

%/ / P.1 0

TABLB4.vEXEERIMEN T 2 VARIABLE S AN D LEVEL S NUMBE RVARIABLE UNIT S LO W HIG

H LEVE L (-1 ) LEVE

L (+1 ) 1 Ai

r Ho w 2 Styrene Content 3 Suppressan

t 4 Ge l Tim e CF M % % MINUTES 160

0 3 3 0 4 0 300 0

5 0 1. 5

TABL E 5
. STYREN E EMISSION S BY LOCATIO N AN D METHO D I N EXPERIMEN

T 1 RU N BAT H TWA NUMBER EMISSIONS , ^s-a y fO 1 5 0 2 -J 3 3 S O 4 1 3 5 S 3 6 Ti 7 3 * 8 s s 9 ^ < 1 0 so n 5- 5 1 2 PP M

ftV/.A:-LAft'" LK, : ' DOSIMETE R < < 31 2
" 170 3 X2C
. 94 5 » l 85 7 "•*

- 44 5
' i 93 3 1 -'-~ 30 3
' ~ 151 1
' • 48 9 '• • 82 4 i ; 85 5 74 4 FRON T

TW A EMISSIONS , PP M DOSIMETE R 4 9 524 16 3 166 13 3 10 9 4 2 46 2 11 2 26 4 7 3 13 6 STACK" * » • STAC K EMISSIONS , EMISSIONS , LBS. " *I_BS ;

CHARCOAL DOSIMETE R 1.9 4 3.2 8 2.3 5 2.5 5 3.3 5 4.5 6 3.1 9 1. 5 2.8 6 3.2 8 3.6 3 4.5 4 i7.f

e •2*1- 6 32- 4 -2.1."2 * 4b- i ^l.-S " 43
. = 1 2.0. 7 2o. o 2 ; : - "^** * ~ - 4 •• . i TUB E 1.0 9 <\A 3.3 5 W ; 2.7 7 *B.i 2.9 6 2<-.*
. ni l — ni l — 2.64 3i-- i 1.5 6 2i.- r ni l — 1.6 8 '-:• • 4.2 8 :•• rai — AV4 r"*>1- l TABLE 6
. TH E SIGNIFICANC E O F TH E FACTOR S O N STYREN E EMISSION S OVE R TH E BAT H 2 1 . Z INK. " K/o T AV C *

.
FACTO R Styren e Temp
. Ai r Ho w Supp
. F RATI O

0.035 6 31.389 5 29.217 9 0.779 8 PRO B > F

0.856 6 0.001 4 0.001 7 0.411 2 SIGNIFICANT ? N o Ye s Ye s N oP.1 1

TABLE 7 . TH E SIGNIFICANC E O F TH E FACTORS O

N STYREN

E EMISSIONS FO RTH E SIMULATED WORKE REXPOSUR

E FOREXP . 1 FACTO RF RATI O Styren e Temp . Ai r Flo w Supp . Ge l Tim e 0.348 0 16.0142 12.556 4 0.639 2 _XUU25
_ PROB> F

0.880 9 0.010 3 0.016 5 0.460 3 0.715 4 ~/ ff f.et> v c-t SIGNIFICANT ? N o Ye s Yes No -2J5.0 TABL E 8 . TH E SIGNIFICANC E O F TH E FACTORS O

N STYRlEN

E EMISSION S I N THE STAC K FO REXP . 1 FACTO RF RATIO PROB> F SIGNIFICANT ? Styren e Temp. Ai r Ho w Supp . Ge l Tung , 10.208 4

0.111 1 24.002 0 6.818 6 ,0.41.13 - 0.024 1

0.993 2 0.004 5 0.004 5 /<

_R.&t"-''- T Ye s N o Ye s Ye s -NO LO W STVR£N E 2-8 ,

VJ T C,l,Ox.a .v.o_ j Cter* ; H_.ou j $*£ $ RU

N COMPARISO N O F STYREN E EMISSIONS DURIN G AND AFTE

RWINDIN G 

### <=£ > DURING , LB S AFTER , LB S TOTA

L

~ " 1 t o 2 S u c 3 LC * 4 S

- • - 5 S 6 7 8 S M S 1.7

9 1.6 1 2.4 6 1.9 7 1.6 1 2.0 1 3.1 5 2.1 4 0.4 4

0.1 2 0.2 8 0.5 8 0.5 5 0.1 3 0.8 2 0.2 7 3 3

3 3 5 0 -S o 3 3 3 3 5< 9 2.2 3 1.7 3 2.74 2.5 5 2.1 6 2.1 4 3.9 7 2.4 1 "7.2 *

l.Z'o VI.' 1 i l
. J 7
. "?-?' - l O 

### n. ; 

### : Ef*V$

.

3 s . 1 

### 24- i 23. 1
36>.\

A v •;- 2 . /

.•** - TABL E 10 . STATISTICA L SIGNIFICANC E O F STAC K EMISSION S DURIN G WINDIN G FOREXP . 2 -7. 5

FACTO RF RATIO PROB> f SIGNIFICANT ? Styren e Ai r Ho w Supp . 21.450 4

3.672 1 12.904 7 0.0057

0.113 5 0.015 7 Ye s Ye s Ye s 

# 1 °P.1 2

TABLE 11 . STATISTICA L SIGNIFICANC E O F STAC K EMISSION S AFTE R WINDING FO

REXP . 2 FACTO R Styren e Ai r Ho w Supp . Ge l Tim e F RATI

O 7.081 1 2.41 0 0.878 9 28.830 8 PRO

B > F 0.0563 0.195 4 0.401 6 0.005 8 SIGNIFICANT ? Ye s N o N o Ye s



## llP.1 3

Figur e 1 . Schemati c o

f filamen t windin g experimen t 1

Figur e 2 . Tota l enclosure aroun d filamen t winde r



## I* -P. M

Figur e 3 . Th e effec t o f temperatur e o n styren e concentratio n (ppm ) ove r th e bat h



### I . a.thTWA

. 2 1 7S O 1 SOO - 1250 - 1000 - 7SO - 500 - •

6 5 . •"* " " __-

^ y' ^^

y'

* i 1 i i i 7 0 7 5 8 0 S S S O G S Temp. . * F Leverag e

Figur e 4 . Th e effect o

f ai r flo w o n th e styren e concentratio n (ppm ) ove r th e bat h

t = & 

# 1
c S * l zs o i soo - 1250 - 1 ooo - 7SO - soo 2SO— | *•»» ,

> v v % "** » ^^^

_**

. *"**--

. ^^" ^ **•* » ***- . ^ S s v

_*•* *

***• * ^* s - ^

_"***-

.

i i i • 1 oo o O IOO O 200 0

Ai r Flow , cf m Leverag e 300 0



## | 3



# _ JP.1 5

Figur e 7 . Styren e emission s v s tim e fo r filamen t windin g

3 1 2 2 1 J O 3 3 4 S 5 7 « 7 S M « 3 10 2 11 1 12 0 12 9 13 8 14 7 IS S 16

S Time , mi n



## I *