Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 9;10(1):11282.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-67771-3.

Complex study of air pollution in electroplating workshop

K Yu Kirichenko  1 , I A Vakhniuk  1 , V V Ivanov  1 , I A Tarasenko  2 , D Yu Kosyanov  1 , S A Medvedev  3 , V P Soparev  4 , V A Drozd  1 , A S Kholodov  1   2 , K S Golokhvast  5   6
Affiliations

Complex study of air pollution in electroplating workshop

K Yu Kirichenko et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

A comprehensive analysis of the state of air inside an industrial workshop with electroplating production was carried out. The data of quantitative distribution of suspended particles by size fractions (PM0.3, PM0.5, PM1, PM3, PM5, PM10) are presented for 15 main processes of electroplating. Morphometric and chemical composition of the surface of particles were studied. We observed particles of rounded shape, various agglomerates with complex geometric shapes, acute-angular particles, which when inhaled pose a maximum threat to human health. Chemical analysis of these particles showed an absolute predominance of oxides of non-ferrous metals, the percentage of which varied depending on the type of electroplating bath. The content of highly hazardous substances of the 1st (Zn, Pb, and Cd) and the 2nd (Cu, Cr, Ni, Co, and Mo) hazard classes in each sample was recorded.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sampling of industrial aerosol particles in the electroplating workshop. H = 1.5 m (Example).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of size distribution of particles of electroplating origin from all processes.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Size distribution of particles in sample 1) No. 4 (aluminum degreasing), and 2) No. 12 (nickel plating).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Aluminum cleaning. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. 1) Magnification ×1,200, 2) Magnification ×2,200.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Aluminum etching. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Magnification ×300.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Sulfuric acid anodizing. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Aluminum degreasing. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Magnification ×950.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Chemical degreasing. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Measuring interval 50 µm.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Cathodic degreasing 3. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Measuring interval 100 µm.
Figure 10
Figure 10
Cathodic degreasing 4. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Measuring interval 50 µm.
Figure 11
Figure 11
Cold rinse. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Measuring interval 20 µm.
Figure 12
Figure 12
Desmutting. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Measuring interval 20 µm.
Figure 13
Figure 13
Nonferrous metals etching. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Measuring interval 50 µm.
Figure 14
Figure 14
Chromium plating. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. 1) Measuring interval 50 µm, 2) Measuring interval 5 µm.
Figure 15
Figure 15
Nickel plating. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. 1) Measuring interval 20 µm, 2) Measuring interval 50 µm.
Figure 16
Figure 16
Chemical nickel plating. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. Measuring interval 10 µm.
Figure 17
Figure 17
Cadmium plating. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. 1) Measuring interval 20 µm, 2) measuring interval 10 µm.
Figure 18
Figure 18
Silvering. Particles morphology. Scanning electronic microscopy. 1) Measuring interval 20 µm.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Trushkova, E.A., Gorbatkova, A.V. & Velchenko, A.A. Hygienic assessment of the working conditions of electroplaters. In Proceedings of the International Research and Practice Conference “Actual areas of innovative development of animal breeding and modern technologies of food production”. Persianovsky Settlement, November 28–29, 2016, 306–309. (in Russian)
    1. Omelchenko, E.V., Trushkova, E.A., Sidelnikov, M.V., Pushenko, S.L. & Staseva, E.V. Algorithm research exposure dust emissions enterprises of building production on the environment. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci.50 (1), Article 012018 (2017)
    1. Makisha, N. & Yunchina, M. Methods and solutions for galvanic wastewater treatment. MATEC Web of Conferences106, Article 07016 (2017)
    1. Mavletov MN, Berezin NB, Yarullin AZ, Farrakhov GR, Nurullin AB. The use of a circulation station for cleaning rinse water in electroplating workshops. Bull. Technol. Univ. 2017;20(2):51–53.
    1. Dyachenko AV, Ilyin VI. Development of technical solutions to reduce environmental pollution by electroplating. Ecol. Ind. Prod. 2009;3:47–49.

Publication types